muffmonster Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 He launched his helmet to Lee's chin. He left his feet and led with his helmet. From my understanding that is an illegal hit.
Mango Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Hit was boarder line. Looks like Tate is leading with his helmet. Lee gets hit pretty good with his helmet right in the rib cage, but he has to be more aware than that. Tate is more or less fined I think for celebrating on top of an injured player on the field. It is a close call between legal and illegal. The lack of respect for the guy on the ground pushes the league to heir on the side of illegal I think. Minus the celebration and I don't think we hear much about this
#34fan Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 The NFL, which is the only sanctioning body that matters in this particular instance, agrees with me; not you. I find it peculiar that you claim to love the sport but have no compassion for the men who play it; or respect for the rules that govern it. Why is it so hard for you to come out and say that you get great enjoyment from watching other human beings suffer repeated blunt force head trauma? There no spot on the human body that cannot be damaged when struck by another human running at full speed. None. whether you lead with the helmet, the kneecaps, or yes, even the shoulder, there is NO WAY to guarantee injury-free tackle football. Even shoulder takedowns are dicey, since a player tackling with his shoulderpads risks injury to his head, neck, clavicle, scapula, and sternum. You could concievably SHOESTRING TACKLE a guy and cause injury. Don't think so? -Ask Darelle Revis. My point is this: Danger is something that is inherent in ALL sport, to varying degrees. Anyone who's ever been beaned by a golf ball, smashed in the face by a basketball, checked into the glass playing hockey, or bulldozed while blocking home plate knows what I'm talking about. Sport is about pushing the human body to it's physical limit, -and then going further. The participants acknowledge the risks and proceed in the path they've chosen. It's a huge part of why we admire them.
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 You can't launch into another player and use your head as a weapon. End of story. You might think of these guys as otherwise useless meatsacks put on this earth for no other reason than to entertain you with their eminent brain trauma, but the NFL has decided that your position is ugly and meritless, and have thankfully chosen a rule set that treats their players like human beings, and recognises the fragility of the human brain. If you don't like it, turn off your TV. I'm not sure he launched... But he definitely speared him. And never mind the "there was no flag" excuse...there should have been one. If he'd put his shoulder into him, that would have been a great, clean hit.
K-9 Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 There no spot on the human body that cannot be damaged when struck by another human running at full speed. None. whether you lead with the helmet, the kneecaps, or yes, even the shoulder, there is NO WAY to guarantee injury-free tackle football. Even shoulder takedowns are dicey, since a player tackling with his shoulderpads risks injury to his head, neck, clavicle, scapula, and sternum. You could concievably SHOESTRING TACKLE a guy and cause injury. Don't think so? -Ask Darelle Revis. My point is this: Danger is something that is inherent in ALL sport, to varying degrees. Anyone who's ever been beaned by a golf ball, smashed in the face by a basketball, checked into the glass playing hockey, or bulldozed while blocking home plate knows what I'm talking about. Sport is about pushing the human body to it's physical limit, -and then going further. The participants acknowledge the risks and proceed in the path they've chosen. It's a huge part of why we admire them. Nice speech. But it's not germane to anything the league has established with regard to mitigating the exposure to brain injuries. While all calls by the refs are arbitrary, the NFL is seeking to establish and refine guidelines relative to the very real issue of brain trauma injuries. If that's the pussification of the league, so be it. Look for the NFL to make further changes in both rules and enforcement going forward. The game has changed. Either accept that or stop watching. The NFL couldn't care less. GO BILLS!!!
Best Player Available Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 You can't launch into another player and use your head as a weapon. End of story. You might think of these guys as otherwise useless meatsacks put on this earth for no other reason than to entertain you with their eminent brain trauma, but the NFL has decided that your position is ugly and meritless, and have thankfully chosen a rule set that treats their players like human beings, and recognises the fragility of the human brain. If you don't like it, turn off your TV. Well your close. It isn't the NFL that decided the position is ugly and meritless. it's the NFL Attorneys that "guide" the execs on these issues. It's called as you're aware liability. The NFL could care less until it became a issue then a class action suit.
#34fan Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Nice speech. But it's not germane to anything the league has established with regard to mitigating the exposure to brain injuries. While all calls by the refs are arbitrary, the NFL is seeking to establish and refine guidelines relative to the very real issue of brain trauma injuries. If that's the pussification of the league, so be it. Look for the NFL to make further changes in both rules and enforcement going forward. The game has changed. Either accept that or stop watching. The NFL couldn't care less. GO BILLS!!! Hey, I can also NOT accept it, and keep watching too. -As a fan, I reserve the right to call Bullsh*t whenever a flag, or a fine goes against what I feel is the spirit of the game. You see, whether the league wants to confront it, or not, there's going to be a backlash for what many fans, (and players) feel is undue tampering with the sport. A backlash which has to be reconciled against the tens of millions in settlement cash going to current, and former players with symptoms of trauma, -which is what all this hit-fine crap is really about. As it stands now, the NFL is in danger of being crushed under the weight of these lawsuits. So, It's not pussification, as much as it is liquefication from the gound-up. From a financial standpoint, the league, and it's owner's situation is untennable. I'm not sure what part the CBA plays in all this, but at some point, It will come down to the acceptance of some personal responsibility on the part of players. OR the NFL, as we know it, could forseeably dissolve.
Bookie Man Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 I would say this is very borderline. His helmet looks to hit mostly chest maybe a little chin. I feel like it could have been called either way. Kind of reminds me of the Nigel Bradham hit.
K-9 Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Hey, I can also NOT accept it, and keep watching too. -As a fan, I reserve the right to call Bullsh*t whenever a flag, or a fine goes against what I feel is the spirit of the game. You see, whether the league wants to confront it, or not, there's going to be a backlash for what many fans, (and players) feel is undue tampering with the sport. A backlash which has to be reconciled against the tens of millions in settlement cash going to current, and former players with symptoms of trauma, -which is what all this hit-fine crap is really about. As it stands now, the NFL is in danger of being crushed under the weight of these lawsuits. So, It's not pussification, as much as it is liquefication from the gound-up. From a financial standpoint, the league, and it's owner's situation is untennable. I'm not sure what part the CBA plays in all this, but at some point, It will come down to the acceptance of some personal responsibility on the part of players. OR the NFL, as we know it, could forseeably dissolve. Backlash? And just how will this 'backlash' manifest itself? The NFL laughs at the thought of that. At least until the TV contract has expired and fans have shown they are no longer willing to make the NFL the most popular sport in America by a wide margin. Are you gonna organize the boycott? Backlash. That's a good one. The NFL won't be crushed by any lawsuit. It will be settled long before that. GO BILLS!!!
#34fan Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) Backlash. That's a good one. The NFL won't be crushed by any lawsuit. It will be settled long before that. GO BILLS!!! Probably what the league thought the first time they heard of "Traumatic Brain Injury" -Wonder what they think now? Small problems have a way of getting bigger. IF they're as arrogant as you imply, there may be even more trouble on the horizon. Edited September 20, 2012 by #34fan
#34fan Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 At this point, there's WAY too many well-paid lawyers involved for the drama to stop. Twenty years ago that same hit would have made everyone's highlight reel.
Maury Ballstein Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 At this point, there's WAY too many well-paid lawyers involved for the drama to stop. Twenty years ago that same hit would have made everyone's highlight reel. Exactly......this whole thread is just opinions as some are ready to tar and feather Tate and others appreciate a football play. Some are affected by the lawyer talk on concussions that is the latest rage, others are used to football and don't want to see much change. I say bust out the flag football.....too many crap penalties for good hits and vice versa the game is becoming a joke IMO (see jets steelers PI call over hard hit)
K-9 Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Probably what the league thought the first time they heard of "Traumatic Brain Injury" -Wonder what they think now? Small problems have a way of getting bigger. IF they're as arrogant as you imply, there may be even more trouble on the horizon. Litigation and subsequent rules changes are what's new. The league has known about brain injuries forever. They've also known that many of its players starting suffering from early signs of dementia much earlier than the general populace. The lawsuit will be settled because it's in the best interests of the plaintiffs to do so. Killing the NFL will kill the long-term care they are after. Obviously it's in the best interest of the league to settle as well. As for the 'arrogance' of the NFL, they are firmly entrenched as the most popular sport in the land with the unprecedented broadcast revenues to match. They don't have to sweat those TV deals until those contracts expire after the 2022 season. I just don't see what leverage the average fan has, unless they stop supporting it cold turkey and that entails much more than just not watching or listening to the games. Anyway, look for more rules seeking to mitigate brain injuries. GO BILLS!!!
Boludo Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 of course this is an illegal hit under the new rules if you can't immediately recognize that you need to adjust your understanding of today's NFL rules ASAP
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Posted September 20, 2012 Those hits being glorified leads to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf-qgqLqzds Nobody wants their kid playing football unless that is absolutely removed from the game. Clearly Florida Gators material, though...
Maury Ballstein Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 Clearly Florida Gators material, though... Do we have our scouts on this guy ? I joke
NoSaint Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 It's 21k as a flat fine. Everyone gets it as a first offense. That number will raise 5% annually. That hit was ugly and dangerous. Hopefully losing the 21k will protect Tate from himself and those around him. It was totally unneeded to go for a kill shot, but if he wanted to there were plenty of ways to blow the guy up without risking life. Frankly the slightest bump takes lee out of that play though.
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 It's 21k as a flat fine. Everyone gets it as a first offense. That number will raise 5% annually. That hit was ugly and dangerous. Hopefully losing the 21k will protect Tate from himself and those around him. It was totally unneeded to go for a kill shot, but if he wanted to there were plenty of ways to blow the guy up without risking life. Frankly the slightest bump takes lee out of that play though. Season 1: First offense half game suspension, second: full game, third: four games, fourth: 8 games, fifth: season. Each penalty too be accompanied by the corosponding amount of game checks. Time suspended to be deducted from NFL service time in relation to pension.
NoSaint Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 Season 1: First offense half game suspension, second: full game, third: four games, fourth: 8 games, fifth: season. Each penalty too be accompanied by the corosponding amount of game checks. Time suspended to be deducted from NFL service time in relation to pension. Disagree. I think it's easy enough to get caught with an unexpected move or awkward body position that only repeat or especially heinous offenders should see suspension. More like a 3 strikes type rule before gameplan missed. Truth is, even in good clean football ugly hits can happen. That doesn't mean they should be celebrated like some of these guys are arguing but there does need to be some balance between "teach them a lesson" and "sometimes you miss what you were going for by accident"
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 21, 2012 Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Disagree. I think it's easy enough to get caught with an unexpected move or awkward body position that only repeat or especially heinous offenders should see suspension. More like a 3 strikes type rule before gameplan missed. Truth is, even in good clean football ugly hits can happen. That doesn't mean they should be celebrated like some of these guys are arguing but there does need to be some balance between "teach them a lesson" and "sometimes you miss what you were going for by accident" OK. I can see that argument, and will recognise it. First hit: half a game check, Second: three quarter game check, Third: you played for free + ejection from current game, Fourth: four games + four games pay, Fifth: 16 games + loss of 16 games pay + loss of service time, Sixth: indefinite ban Edited September 21, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
Recommended Posts