| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tylerdouglass
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| DetroitSpirit wrote: | | tylerdouglass wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | kmvoss wrote: | The fine is enough of a validation for me. Arguing with apologists is frivolous.
Clearly intentional and I think future infractions will only lend credence. Dude is building a resume and I don't see it stopping any time soon. |
Last time I checked two incidents is not really building anything. That resume would get you laughed out of a job interview |
Comparing a job resume to a resume of dirty hits (3, not 2. Delhomme, Thanksgiving stomp, crotch kick) is the only thing that's laughable.
Suh has a history. There's no way around it, and denying it does nothing for your credibility as a poster. |
Well, I don't want to end up like you so...
BURN SUH ALIVE!! |
1) My post has nothing to do with if/how much he should be punished.
2) I've said multiple times that a suspension for this incident would be too much.
Like I said, credibility.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
detfan782004
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 39435
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional
_________________
FFMD II AGM- DETROIT LIONS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| eagles101 wrote: | | Flaccomania wrote: | | eagles101 wrote: | | Flaccomania wrote: | | eagles101 wrote: |
but he has no prior incidents like this. he has had issue with dirty/borderline dirty plays. and one incident of letting his anger get the best of him....but not taking shots like this at players. so that plus no way of clearly or semi clearly knowing he meant to do it means he shouldnt be suspended or fined. |
So wait..
"He doesn't have a history of this... except that one time. Oh, and this other stuff that's semi-related. But he's never tried to kick a guy in the crotch before." |
no. he has a history of tackling very roughly. dirty or not dirty that is what he does...a lot. he has one time of getting into a fight with another player and stomping him.
he does not have a history of cheap shots. things of this nature. the kicking in the down stairs, hitting people just to hit them, or what have you. |
Again, what you're saying is "He doesn't have a history of doing it, except that one time." |
shouldnt argue with you since i know when you get something in head that someone is saying theres nothing that can change your mind.....but what im saying is his previous on the field action are not related to this one. the things he normally does is not even remotely close to this...and the ONE thing that he has done is also not really in the same ball field as this. |
Suh had numerous incidents, including three unsportsmanlike fines, prior to last years stomp. As well as a well publicized meeting with the commisioner of the league to discuss his play, the fines, the penalties, etc. All before he had played 2 full seasons in the NFL. Anyone suggesting the guy doesnt have a history is
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters.
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
detfan782004
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 39435
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters. |
No he said
Players don't get fined for accidental contact ---. ---fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
_________________
FFMD II AGM- DETROIT LIONS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters. |
No he said
Players don't get fined for accidental contact ---. ---fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional. |
TO THE GROIN!
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
detfan782004
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 39435
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters. |
No he said
Players don't get fined for accidental contact ---. ---fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional. |
TO THE GROIN! |
Input ANY fine now and there you have it.
_________________
FFMD II AGM- DETROIT LIONS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26377
Location: Madison
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters. |
No he said
Players don't get fined for accidental contact ---. ---fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional. |
TO THE GROIN! |
oh my god.
It should be THIS easy. How is it not that easy?
It was easy for you. It SHOULD be easy for everyone.
Makes me sad
detfan - yes, I CLEARLY stated that contact to the groin is never fined unless intentional. I guarantee you cannot find a single case of a player being find for unintentional contact to the groin.
The only unintentional contact that IS fined is contact to the head.
I will be forever sad if you STILL cannot see the truth of this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | incognito_man wrote: | | diehardlionfan wrote: |
If they fine him it shows it was an infraction but not worthy of suspension. A fine indicates the contact wasn't on purpose. |
No.
Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin. If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional.
Which wouldn't make sense.
They should either deem it intentional and hand out a suspension or not penalize it all if they're not certain it was intentional. |
Got it do every fine means those guys intentionally lead with hear, horse collared, hit defenseless receiver and so on.
Guess I missed memo saying fine = intentional. |
To the groin?
He specifically said "to the groin" |
| Quote: | | If he's fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional |
Therefore ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. They are doing it intentional |
He is saying yes, unintentional H2H hits are may be fined. Unintentional kicks to the groin arent.
To the groin=context. Context is important. Context matters. |
No he said
Players don't get fined for accidental contact ---. ---fined it's 100% because they deemed it to be intentional. |
TO THE GROIN! |
Input ANY fine now and there you have it. |
"Players don't get fined for accidental contact to the groin."
The sentence that followed immediately after that one was clearly in reference to his point about kicks to the groin. Again, its called context. Its important. It matters.
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Integrity
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3873
Location: Columbia
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think the fine was sufficient. If it was obviously intentional, then maybe a suspension would be warranted.
_________________
Last edited by Integrity on Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| detfan782004 wrote: | | ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. |
So you admit anyone fined is dirty?
See... anything is possible when you remove context!
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
detfan782004
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 39435
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | detfan782004 wrote: | | ANYONE FINED IS DIRTY. |
So you admit anyone fined is dirty?
See... anything is possible when you remove context! |
I am being sarcastic.
a kick to head that was intentional and him staring at is FAR more dangerous and Bunkley wont see half this.
Pathetic double standards
_________________
FFMD II AGM- DETROIT LIONS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bbllstr22
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 6349
Location: Hell. The only place where the devil's advocate can reside.
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Late to thread so I apologize if I'm just restating previous posts.
A) If this was an 'accident', why are they fining on an 'accident'?
B) If this was intentional, why are they only fining a meager amount and not suspending?
C) Either way, when they have suspended and fined many players on many occasions before based on the intent of players, why can't they determine Suh's intent on this action?
The hypocrisy of the NFL isn't even amusing at this point.
_________________
Reggie Wayne for HOF
Career---------968 receptions (10th), 13063 yards (14th), 78 TDs (24th)
Playoffs--------92 receptions (2nd), 1242 yards (4th), 9 TDs (7th) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25271
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bbllstr22 wrote: | Late to thread so I apologize if I'm just restating previous posts.
A) If this was an 'accident', why are they fining on an 'accident'?
B) If this was intentional, why are they only fining a meager amount and not suspending?
C) Either way, when they have suspended and fined many players on many occasions before based on the intent of players, why can't they determine Suh's intent on this action?
The hypocrisy of the NFL isn't even amusing at this point. |
It's impossible to exercise 100% consistency and use your judgment on a case by case basis at the same time. That doesnt mean anyone is being hypocritical.
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26377
Location: Madison
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bbllstr22 wrote: | Late to thread so I apologize if I'm just restating previous posts.
A) If this was an 'accident', why are they fining on an 'accident'?
B) If this was intentional, why are they only fining a meager amount and not suspending? |
Agreed. It's inconsistent and doesn't pass muster with me.
They gotta make a call on it. It can't be partially on purpose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
