| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tylerdouglass
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| awkrewen wrote: | I have no issues with this fine assuming it is not the only fine of its kind this year. If this is a one time fine and it never comes up again I will probably think it is absurd.
As for what Sanders did I have no issues with it. It is a smart football play. Give your QB a few more moments to recover and not have to waste a valuable time out or get a delay of game. |
Its not a smart football play because it's outside of the rules of normal football.
Is taking out a good RBs knees on purpose a "good football play" because your defense doesn't have to worry about that player anymore?
Hell, by that logic, the Saints were one of the smartest teams out there. 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rise
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TytybearsFan21 wrote: | | rise wrote: | | atown703 wrote: | | He's an idiot for doing it.. I have no remorse for liars and cheaters |
I don't think that word means what you think it means... |
Don't be rediculous. Homies gettin PAYED! He should of no remorse for him! |
Hahaha, well plaid!
_________________
| xKURTWARNERx wrote: |
Just like your team, classy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mesa_Titan
Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 48834
Location: Kiltman on the sig!!!
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Good. He should be suspended, IMO.
Anyone who does it should miss the next week.
Also, the Victor Cruz situation is not close to the same, you have no clue whether or not he was rocked. Was some pretty wicked whiplash from that hit.
_________________
| FootballPhreak wrote: | | Stanton is garbage |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sp6488
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 6262
Location: MD
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | This is a result of the NFL's absolutely moronic rules in the first place...
Peko - or whomever it was that was hitting Ben - continued to hit him while he was down resulting in Ben CLEARLY being in pain. However, Ben could not leave the field otherwise it would have cost the team a timeout and/or Ben for a play on a crucial 3rd down on the next play. So he told Sanders to go down so that he - the 3rd receiver - would have to leave as opposed to the star quarterback...
|
So you admit it was more the fact Ben would have been missing for a play if they didn't want to waste a TO.
Funnily enough I wouldn't say calling a TO to treat your injured star QB is actually a waste of a TO.
Or do you think they should have stopped the game until Ben was ok again ?
What would you actually have liked to have happened in this situation ? |
Exactly what did happen is 100% fine with me. Had the Bengals did it I wouldn't have had a problem with it. This isn't two Giants simultaneously going down because the defense couldn't hang. It was a player was actually injured but did not want to come out on a crucial play so a less significant player went out. I don't mind that it was fined. I'm more worried that this is yet another example of the Steelers being the first team fined under the Goodell era. |
You still haven't said what should be done in this sort of situation,you refer to the "NFL's absolutely moronic rules" yet don't give an alternative to this. |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
In an age where player safety is supposed to be the no1 concern of the NFL do you honestly expect them to do this. |
The problem is player safety is SUPPOSED to be the number one concern but isn't. I'm all for player safety. I'm just not for Goodell acting like player safety is tantamount for him. If it were there were plenty of things he could implement but doesn't. But that's neither here nor there. |
I don't quite understand this comment. So because Goodell doesn't take every measure that you think he/the league could to further player safety, you are opposed to him taking any measures that further player safety?
_________________
| Tzimisce wrote: | I'm sorry you're drowning in a sea of delusion.
I won't be sorry when the Ravens finish 8-8. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fender
Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Posts: 811
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keleth
Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 2597
Location: Restaurant at the end of the universe
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| sp6488 wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | This is a result of the NFL's absolutely moronic rules in the first place...
Peko - or whomever it was that was hitting Ben - continued to hit him while he was down resulting in Ben CLEARLY being in pain. However, Ben could not leave the field otherwise it would have cost the team a timeout and/or Ben for a play on a crucial 3rd down on the next play. So he told Sanders to go down so that he - the 3rd receiver - would have to leave as opposed to the star quarterback...
|
So you admit it was more the fact Ben would have been missing for a play if they didn't want to waste a TO.
Funnily enough I wouldn't say calling a TO to treat your injured star QB is actually a waste of a TO.
Or do you think they should have stopped the game until Ben was ok again ?
What would you actually have liked to have happened in this situation ? |
Exactly what did happen is 100% fine with me. Had the Bengals did it I wouldn't have had a problem with it. This isn't two Giants simultaneously going down because the defense couldn't hang. It was a player was actually injured but did not want to come out on a crucial play so a less significant player went out. I don't mind that it was fined. I'm more worried that this is yet another example of the Steelers being the first team fined under the Goodell era. |
You still haven't said what should be done in this sort of situation,you refer to the "NFL's absolutely moronic rules" yet don't give an alternative to this. |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
In an age where player safety is supposed to be the no1 concern of the NFL do you honestly expect them to do this. |
The problem is player safety is SUPPOSED to be the number one concern but isn't. I'm all for player safety. I'm just not for Goodell acting like player safety is tantamount for him. If it were there were plenty of things he could implement but doesn't. But that's neither here nor there. |
I don't quite understand this comment. So because Goodell doesn't take every measure that you think he/the league could to further player safety, you are opposed to him taking any measures that further player safety? |
When it concerns the Steelers losing a time out because their QB is hurt it appears so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keleth
Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 2597
Location: Restaurant at the end of the universe
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fender
Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Posts: 811
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Keleth wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
Yeah I get it, its just a ridiculous notion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tylerdouglass
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rise wrote: | | TytybearsFan21 wrote: | | rise wrote: | | atown703 wrote: | | He's an idiot for doing it.. I have no remorse for liars and cheaters |
I don't think that word means what you think it means... |
Don't be rediculous. Homies gettin PAYED! He should of no remorse for him! |
Hahaha, well plaid! |
Anyways, how much will the Bears be fined for allowing Cutler to play with a concussion? Will it be more than the fine on the guy who gave him the concussion?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlaqOptic
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 26330
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Fender wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
Yeah I get it, its just a ridiculous notion. |
Almost as ridiculous that a guy has to take a play off because he was hit hard despite being cognizant and showing a desire to immediately return to the game unless he has to burn a team timeout.
_________________
| sayheykid wrote: | | Eksynyt wrote: | | Some people on here brag about the Seahawks having a defense...where is it? |
It's having a hard time concentrating. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RashaanSalaami
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 29147
Location: Jersey
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlaqOptic wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
Yeah I get it, its just a ridiculous notion. |
Almost as ridiculous that a guy has to take a play off because he was hit hard despite being cognizant and showing a desire to immediately return to the game unless he has to burn a team timeout. |
It prevents players from stopping the game at their whim. Think about how much this would be abused if you could just allow injured players to go in the next play. I'm sure the way the rule is has prevented many players with more minor injuries just go down and stop play. Rule absolutely makes sense the way it is.
_________________
Top 50 Franchise Cornerstones (2012) - COMPLETED! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tylerdouglass
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RashaanSalaami wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
Yeah I get it, its just a ridiculous notion. |
Almost as ridiculous that a guy has to take a play off because he was hit hard despite being cognizant and showing a desire to immediately return to the game unless he has to burn a team timeout. |
It prevents players from stopping the game at their whim. Think about how much this would be abused if you could just allow injured players to go in the next play. I'm sure the way the rule is has prevented many players with more minor injuries just go down and stop play. Rule absolutely makes sense the way it is. |
Close games would take an extra 45 minutes while players faked injuries to buy their team some time.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fender
Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Posts: 811
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlaqOptic wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | Keleth wrote: | | Fender wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: |
Allow a player to remain in the game unless it is a head injury without forcing a team to take a timeout unless it is within the final 6 minutes of a half in a one score game. Simple enough really. |
What are you saying here? Ben IS allowed to stay in the game?!? Getting a boo-boo doesn't entitle Ben to have a play stoppage? What kind of nonsense is that? |
What he means is that if an injury time out is given then the player who the time out was called for should be allowed straight back in the game.
Not that that would encourage even more injury faking at all. |
Yeah I get it, its just a ridiculous notion. |
Almost as ridiculous that a guy has to take a play off because he was hit hard despite being cognizant and showing a desire to immediately return to the game unless he has to burn a team timeout. |
Its about stoppage of play and flow of the game. The NFL does everything it can to make sure the game passes in a timely manner as expected by fans. They cannot have any player deciding to stop the game because he is a little shaken up, there is a reason for the 24/sec clock. Without these measures the game would turn into golf and be exceeding painful to watch.
This is no different than saying the defense should be allowed to 'pause' the gameplay while they catch their breath. Under your rules there would be no need for timeouts....
And further, the rules did not keep Ben from 'returning to the game'... all he had to do was line up and snap the ball. What the rules keep him from doing is 'stalling' because he got shaken up. Big Ben should not get to decide when the 24sec clock applies to him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
