John from Riverside Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Here we have Tucker (who threw a perfectly legal block...he was not engaged) and basically here is Abraham on top of Tucker throwing blows....no friggen flag
Alaska Darin Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Here we have Tucker (who threw a perfectly legal block...he was not engaged) and basically here is Abraham on top of Tucker throwing blows....no friggen flag 107798[/snapback] I'm glad, to be perfectly honest with you. I didn't see the call on Freddie Smith, but I imagine that wasn't even as bad as what Abraham did. The players are FAR more effective at policeing themselves than the referees ever will be. Tucker's a nasty bastard. I really like his moxey.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Here we have Tucker (who threw a perfectly legal block...he was not engaged) and basically here is Abraham on top of Tucker throwing blows....no friggen flag 107798[/snapback] Makes you wonder if the officials have been directed to let the players sort out the legaility of the chop-block. A legal block is a legal block. If Abraham starts wailing on Jennings for riding him out of the play, there'd be a 15 yard personal foul called. Bad non-call.
1billsfan Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Here we have Tucker (who threw a perfectly legal block...he was not engaged) and basically here is Abraham on top of Tucker throwing blows....no friggen flag 107798[/snapback] Three things... 1. keep up the good work Ross 2. I laughed because it looked more like a temper tantrum 3. as long as the refs are not calling penalties on the Bills like they did earlier this season then I'll look away too.
GG Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Frankly, I was more peeved at the non calls about Abraham's constant neutral zone violations. The blatant one came on the play where MW got hurt. While it wasn't directly responsible for the injury, MW was playing catch up from the start, because Abe had a half step from the start.
Risin Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Here we have Tucker (who threw a perfectly legal block...he was not engaged) and basically here is Abraham on top of Tucker throwing blows....no friggen flag 107798[/snapback] What pissed me off is the two Bills standing there watching. Finally, Willis pulled him off...
Bear Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 What pissed me off is the two Bills standing there watching. Finally, Willis pulled him off... 107837[/snapback] I think you were watching the slow-motion replay. He was only on him for about 3 or 4 seconds. Not a lot of time for someone to react. It did look a temper tantrum, didn't it? It was great. Poor Abe, couldn't get a sack.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 What pissed me off is the two Bills standing there watching. Finally, Willis pulled him off... 107837[/snapback] Caught that. Good point.
CosmicBills Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Tucker will be fined for the "legal block". Don't get me wrong, I love Tucker, but it was a cheap shot. You don't cut a man's knees when the play is over and you are coming from behind. It's one thing if you are face up or square with a player to cut him, but Tucker wasn't even close. Abraham never saw him coming. It was the same thing that Denver just did last week and ended the season for...shoot I forget his name. I don't think Tucker was trying to be dirty, he was trying to make a play, but he should know better. Abraham was defending himself. Sometimes it's easy to forget that this game is the players livelyhood. And what Tucker did could have prevented Abraham from ever playing again.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Tucker will be fined for the "legal block". Don't get me wrong, I love Tucker, but it was a cheap shot. You don't cut a man's knees when the play is over and you are coming from behind. It's one thing if you are face up or square with a player to cut him, but Tucker wasn't even close. Abraham never saw him coming. It was the same thing that Denver just did last week and ended the season for...shoot I forget his name. I don't think Tucker was trying to be dirty, he was trying to make a play, but he should know better. Abraham was defending himself. Sometimes it's easy to forget that this game is the players livelyhood. And what Tucker did could have prevented Abraham from ever playing again. 107880[/snapback] I don't think you can be fined for a legal block. In fact, that Denver o-lineman wasn't fined by the league--the league said the block was legal and let it go. While I agree that such a block could be dangerous to a player, that is not what the NFL believes or else it would have forbid cut blocks. If the league doesn't forbid it, then it's fair game.
Guest BackInDaDay Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Tucker will be fined for the "legal block". Don't get me wrong, I love Tucker, but it was a cheap shot. You don't cut a man's knees when the play is over and you are coming from behind. It's one thing if you are face up or square with a player to cut him, but Tucker wasn't even close. Abraham never saw him coming. It was the same thing that Denver just did last week and ended the season for...shoot I forget his name. I don't think Tucker was trying to be dirty, he was trying to make a play, but he should know better. Abraham was defending himself. Sometimes it's easy to forget that this game is the players livelyhood. And what Tucker did could have prevented Abraham from ever playing again. 107880[/snapback] Point taken, and two wrongs don't make a right, but didn't Pat Williams have to leave the game at one point for the same thing? If it was earlier, this may have been pay-back. Either way, it can be a career-ending technique, and I'm sure the NFL will outlaw it in the off-season.
CosmicBills Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Point taken, and two wrongs don't make a right, but didn't Pat Williams have to leave the game at one point for the same thing? If it was earlier, this may have been pay-back. Either way, it can be a career-ending technique, and I'm sure the NFL will outlaw it in the off-season. 107903[/snapback] That's the point. They have outlawed it. But teams still do it. Denver is a prime example. They actually TEACH their linemen to do it because the refs don't call it as much as they should. It is, in my opinion, one of the most barbaric tactics left in the game today and people who continue to use it should not only be fined, but suspended. So I have no problem whatsoever with Abraham defending himself in that situation. Was it right? No. But it certainly was justified.
wnyguy Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Tucker will be fined for the "legal block". Don't get me wrong, I love Tucker, but it was a cheap shot. You don't cut a man's knees when the play is over and you are coming from behind. It's one thing if you are face up or square with a player to cut him, but Tucker wasn't even close. Abraham never saw him coming. It was the same thing that Denver just did last week and ended the season for...shoot I forget his name. I don't think Tucker was trying to be dirty, he was trying to make a play, but he should know better. Abraham was defending himself. Sometimes it's easy to forget that this game is the players livelyhood. And what Tucker did could have prevented Abraham from ever playing again. 107880[/snapback] I seem to remember Tucker being directly in front of Abraham. The Broncos lineman came in from the side. While both are legal blocks there is a big difference between being on front of someone and chopping him or coming in from the side and possibly unseen. Should have been a call on Abraham. Had that been a Bill there would have been a flag.
CosmicBills Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 I seem to remember Tucker being directly in front of Abraham. The Broncos lineman came in from the side. While both are legal blocks there is a big difference between being on front of someone and chopping him or coming in from the side and possibly unseen. Should have been a call on Abraham. Had that been a Bill there would have been a flag. 107914[/snapback] He wasn't infront of him. He was coming from behind/the side. Abraham was coming from the end position and had beaten JJ. Tucker was backpeadaling and looking upfield. He saw Abraham and had to turn around to catch him from behind. Abraham didn't/couldn't see him coming. The NFL rulebook says in that case you must block above the waist.
buckeyebrian Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Tucker will be fined for the "legal block". Don't get me wrong, I love Tucker, but it was a cheap shot. You don't cut a man's knees when the play is over and you are coming from behind. It's one thing if you are face up or square with a player to cut him, but Tucker wasn't even close. Abraham never saw him coming. It was the same thing that Denver just did last week and ended the season for...shoot I forget his name. I don't think Tucker was trying to be dirty, he was trying to make a play, but he should know better. Abraham was defending himself. Sometimes it's easy to forget that this game is the players livelyhood. And what Tucker did could have prevented Abraham from ever playing again. 107880[/snapback] I don't think the play was over and I believe Tucker was right in front of Abraham. Looked to me like he was frustraged that he wasn't making any plays.
#89 Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 There were several NON calls that the JETS got away with but I'll watch the tape before making more comment.
CosmicBills Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 I don't think the play was over and I believe Tucker was right in front of Abraham. Looked to me like he was frustraged that he wasn't making any plays. 107925[/snapback] The whistle had not blown. So the play wasn't over. But Abraham was no where close to the ball and was a nonfactor in the play was my point.
wnyguy Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 He wasn't infront of him. He was coming from behind/the side. Abraham was coming from the end position and had beaten JJ. Tucker was backpeadaling and looking upfield. He saw Abraham and had to turn around to catch him from behind. Abraham didn't/couldn't see him coming. The NFL rulebook says in that case you must block above the waist. 107924[/snapback] Okay if that's true, ( I only saw the replay ) then it was indeed a cheap shot. That being said, there should have been a penalty on Abraham.
CosmicBills Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 There were several NON calls that the JETS got away with but I'll watch the tape before making more comment. 107927[/snapback] You're right, of course. I'm not trying to rag on the Bills at all or say the Refs got it right. I'm just saying that it was a penalty on Tucker and he will be fined by the NFL once they watch the film. Should Abraham reacted that way? No. But I understand why he did. Put it this way. Had that been Kevin Muwai (or however you spell his name) cutting Schobel like that, and had Schobel reacted the same way, no one here would care. In fact people would be pissed that the chop block wasn't called. I'm just saying we have to be fair is all:)
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 We have been hit with so many "light contact" personal fouls this year that it really pisses me off to see Abe throwing punches and not get a flag. I don't care if Tucker deserved it or not. If a guy starts throwing punches, a flag should be thrown!
Recommended Posts