plenzmd1 Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 So Decker and Richardson are fined the same amount for taunting as Gilmore is for that dirty, nasty, injury causing facemask. Atta boy Roger, player safety is always your #1 priority! http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/23/decker-richardson-fined-for-taunting-penalties/
ALF Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Hated to see Marshall injured by that facemask incident.
LeGOATski Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 There was malicious intent behind Gilmore's tackle?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Hated to see Marshall injured by that facemask incident. I don't see it as connected. The facemask was bad as it could have injured his neck, but it didn't. He could well have hurt his knee when tackled in the ordinary way, happens all the time
plenzmd1 Posted September 24, 2016 Author Posted September 24, 2016 There was malicious intent behind Gilmore's tackle? whether there was intent or not, it was a dirty play that should be heavily fined..i don't care whether he INTENDED to injure ...the fact is it was a dirty play that deserves a higher fine than Decker and Richardson talking some chit
pkwwjd Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 That leads to another question. The few times that I've heard the refs say that another penalty will lead to an ejection, it's always been about taunting after the play. Why wouldn't they do the same after vicious late hits and unnecessary roughing penalties? If they really are concerned about safety. Nope, but throw a ball at another player twice and you're ejected ,.. doesn't make sense.
NoSaint Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 whether there was intent or not, it was a dirty play that should be heavily fined..i don't care whether he INTENDED to injure ...the fact is it was a dirty play that deserves a higher fine than Decker and Richardson talking some chit Isn't the fine for several of these penalties negotiated into the CBA as a flat number is minor annual increase That leads to another question. The few times that I've heard the refs say that another penalty will lead to an ejection, it's always been about taunting after the play. Why wouldn't they do the same after vicious late hits and unnecessary roughing penalties? If they really are concerned about safety. Nope, but throw a ball at another player twice and you're ejected ,.. doesn't make sense. Isn't that about after the play personal fouls (often taunting but also the OBJ style late hits and such)
jr1 Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 generic fines to pretend they are "doing something"
snafu Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Why do they fine for taunting? As a deterrent from taunting the next time.
Captain_Quint Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 It looked intentional. Gilmore was sick of getting pushed around and embarrassed by Marshall, so he did the only thing he could, a cheapshot. After the tackle, he didnt try to disguise it, or even look back at Marshall, just walked away.
YoloinOhio Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 As a deterrent from taunting the next time.a penalty seems like plenty for something stupid but harmless
NoSaint Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 a penalty seems like plenty for something stupid but harmless I believe the NFL would argue it could harm the brand
The Frankish Reich Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 It looked intentional. Gilmore was sick of getting pushed around and embarrassed by Marshall, so he did the only thing he could, a cheapshot. After the tackle, he didnt try to disguise it, or even look back at Marshall, just walked away. And it was intentional, but I don't think it was malicious. Here's my problem with it: it was a smart play in a football sense. No way Gilmore was bringing Marshall down without grabbing his face mask -- it was a desperation penalty to stop a touchdown. And it worked. So 15 yards or half the distance + $9,000 just seems woefully inadequate to change the incentive structure here. Not blaming Gilmore so much as saying that the NFL needs to think about how to create a stronger disincentive here.
snafu Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 a penalty seems like plenty for something stupid but harmless Mike Williams got fined for wearing red socks. There's a lot stupid about who gets fined for what. Maybe the league will start fining coaches for kicking off to to one yard line to avoid touchbacks to the 25. Just as stupid, but at least that's justifiable for player safety than fining for socks and taunting.
Fadingpain Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Why is taunting even a penalty? It adds to the show. This is a violent, confrontational game. We need more taunting.
YoloinOhio Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Mike Williams got fined for wearing red socks. There's a lot stupid about who gets fined for what. Maybe the league will start fining coaches for kicking off to to one yard line to avoid touchbacks to the 25. Just as stupid, but at least that's justifiable for player safety than fining for socks and taunting.Gilmore was fined 3k less then Odell Beckham got fined for fake-taking a picture of Victor Cruz doing the salsa ... So dumb
snafu Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Why is taunting even a penalty? It adds to the show. This is a violent, confrontational game. We need more taunting. I tend to agree but it probably would get out of hand in a bad way. And you can't say that one kind of taunting is acceptable but another is offensive. That's why they have the rule. It takes out objectivity. It isn't like baseball -- where the players kind of police themselves, or hockey -- where fighting is built into the sport.
Dirtbag Posted September 24, 2016 Posted September 24, 2016 Why is taunting even a penalty? It adds to the show. This is a violent, confrontational game. We need more taunting. yup. more elaborate touchdown celebrations, too. of course, the nfl views these exhibitions of emotion as somehow damaging to the game. so absurd.
Recommended Posts