The Real Official wildcard game 2 *** Steeler Vs Bengals *** (3 Viewers)

[cheese]

I'm pretty sure Marvin knows the game he is playing same as Tomlin. If either honestly wanted the rivalry reeled in, it would happen. Lip service only from both so this is the risk both are taking. If they had thrown a 2nd asst coach penalty of the game on Pitts Tomlin would have had to live with it too. That's the game these guys are playing. Lewis got burned this time.

I wouldn't call that lack of leadership from either. It's a calculated risk

 

[Steeler]

Mike Silver says several anonymous Bengals are blaming Marvin Lewis for not controlling his team.

"Eventually," one player said, "this (expletive) catches up to you."

Said another: "You put up with enough (expletive) for enough time, guys think they can continually do it."

Blaming the loss on Joey Porter

FWIW no one is blaming the loss on any one thing and certainly not solely for the lack of a flag on Porter. The Bengals imploded from the stupid behavior to the Hill fumble. With that being said if Porter was flagged which he should have been the final outcome MAY have been different. That is all.

But Porter wasn't flagged - saying he should have been is blaming the officials for the outcome IMO. I just don't see why anyone would look at those events after the Burfict hit and come away with the biggest takeaway being that Porter should have been flagged. Maybe. Maybe not. But he wasn't. At that point, Pac Man bumped the official so it's an automatic flag. Clear as day that this situation was the fault of Pac Man losing his cool and nobody else.

 

[Pipes]

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

You left out the part about the coach instigating the other team. No one argued for a flag solely for his being on the field. You have to look at how he conducted himself out there. Bottom line is it should have been a flag, what impact it might have had we'll never know. ETA: Has a coach ever been flagged for instigating another team? Yes, Munchak earlier in the game.

You have video of Porter instigating other players? The video I saw showed Porter standing there with his mouth shut being swarmed by Bengals.

Cameras weren't on him the whole time. Why is he going to be fined by the NFL if he was just standing there with his mouth shut?

 

[ROCKET]

Can't

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

You left out the part about the coach instigating the other team. No one argued for a flag solely for his being on the field. You have to look at how he conducted himself out there. Bottom line is it should have been a flag, what impact it might have had we'll never know. ETA: Has a coach ever been flagged for instigating another team? Yes, Munchak earlier in the game.

You have video of Porter instigating other players? The video I saw showed Porter standing there with his mouth shut being swarmed by Bengals.

I'll just assume that seeing how he is being fined he most likely did something to stir the fire?

 

[Bayhawks]

Burfict hit is a penalty.

Porter being in the mix and the jones lunge getting a penalty is insane.

Completely joke

Was it a joke that the Bengals didn't get 15 yard penalties when Burfict and Hill (among others) charged onto the field after Shazier's hit on Bernard? They had no business being on the field or approaching anyone out there since they weren't involved in the play.Porter was out there initially to check on Brown, which the officials granted him permission to do because of the nature of the injury. Like or not, doesn't matter. Knowing him, I'm sure he had plenty to say about the hit, but it took a childish response from Jones to be penalized. He could've just talked back to Porter and said anything he wanted and nothing would've been done, but he instead chose to try and go THROUGH THE REF to push or hit him? Seriously? And all Porter did was talk with a smirk on his face, hands in his pockets.

The refs were allowing a lot of talking. Pac Man got penalized for the physical contact, especially with the ref.

I think Shazier's hit was nasty. Wasn't on a defenseless receiver so comparing it to Burfict's hit is stupid, but an unnecessary roughness penalty wouldn't have completely surprised me if the refs were trying to send a message. No reason he had to lower his head like that, legal or not. In the end, it was a legal hit by the rules because of where Bernard was, which has been verified numerous times in numerous places... I can understand 100% why Bengals fans and players didn't like it though.

The difference between Shazier's hit and Burfict's hit on Brown was the Burfict was head hunting on a player who clearly had been unable to catch the ball. You can be 100% sure that Burfict's history played a role in it - including the unnecessary dirty hit he put on Maxx Williams last week that's making the rounds now. Per the rules, one hit was legal and one wasn't, but people will see what they want to see.

Burfict's penalty put them into field goal range, but they would've had a couple more cracks to do that. Pac Man's penalty just made it an easier fied goal.

Shazier's hit was against the rules as well.

No, it wasn't.

 

[Neofight]

Mike Silver says several anonymous Bengals are blaming Marvin Lewis for not controlling his team.

"Eventually," one player said, "this (expletive) catches up to you."

Said another: "You put up with enough (expletive) for enough time, guys think they can continually do it."

Blaming the loss on Joey Porter

Sounds like they're also calling out Burfict and Adams, just not directly.

 

[pecorino]

IIRC when I was a kid in the 70s, if a player so much as touched a ref, a penalty was called. Over the past few years I've noticed more and more handsiness between refs and players. With the size and speed and physicality of today's player, seems to me that the league needs to lock that down. Pretty easy rule to enforce: you touch, you're flagged. Do it twice, ejection.

Eta: oh ya, Shazier's hit should have been a penalty. Not so sure about Porter as I don't know what was said and the replays were inconclusive.

 

[Pipes]

Burfict hit is a penalty.

Porter being in the mix and the jones lunge getting a penalty is insane.

Completely joke

Was it a joke that the Bengals didn't get 15 yard penalties when Burfict and Hill (among others) charged onto the field after Shazier's hit on Bernard? They had no business being on the field or approaching anyone out there since they weren't involved in the play.Porter was out there initially to check on Brown, which the officials granted him permission to do because of the nature of the injury. Like or not, doesn't matter. Knowing him, I'm sure he had plenty to say about the hit, but it took a childish response from Jones to be penalized. He could've just talked back to Porter and said anything he wanted and nothing would've been done, but he instead chose to try and go THROUGH THE REF to push or hit him? Seriously? And all Porter did was talk with a smirk on his face, hands in his pockets.

The refs were allowing a lot of talking. Pac Man got penalized for the physical contact, especially with the ref.

I think Shazier's hit was nasty. Wasn't on a defenseless receiver so comparing it to Burfict's hit is stupid, but an unnecessary roughness penalty wouldn't have completely surprised me if the refs were trying to send a message. No reason he had to lower his head like that, legal or not. In the end, it was a legal hit by the rules because of where Bernard was, which has been verified numerous times in numerous places... I can understand 100% why Bengals fans and players didn't like it though.

The difference between Shazier's hit and Burfict's hit on Brown was the Burfict was head hunting on a player who clearly had been unable to catch the ball. You can be 100% sure that Burfict's history played a role in it - including the unnecessary dirty hit he put on Maxx Williams last week that's making the rounds now. Per the rules, one hit was legal and one wasn't, but people will see what they want to see.

Burfict's penalty put them into field goal range, but they would've had a couple more cracks to do that. Pac Man's penalty just made it an easier fied goal.

Shazier's hit was against the rules as well.

No, it wasn't.

Yes it was you cannot lead with the crown of your helmet outside the tackle box. A nfl.com link was posted a few pages back explaining this.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

How often do coaches come out with the intent of instigating?

So no is what youre saying.

 

[Bayhawks]

Burfict hit is a penalty.

Porter being in the mix and the jones lunge getting a penalty is insane.

Completely joke

Was it a joke that the Bengals didn't get 15 yard penalties when Burfict and Hill (among others) charged onto the field after Shazier's hit on Bernard? They had no business being on the field or approaching anyone out there since they weren't involved in the play.Porter was out there initially to check on Brown, which the officials granted him permission to do because of the nature of the injury. Like or not, doesn't matter. Knowing him, I'm sure he had plenty to say about the hit, but it took a childish response from Jones to be penalized. He could've just talked back to Porter and said anything he wanted and nothing would've been done, but he instead chose to try and go THROUGH THE REF to push or hit him? Seriously? And all Porter did was talk with a smirk on his face, hands in his pockets.

The refs were allowing a lot of talking. Pac Man got penalized for the physical contact, especially with the ref.

I think Shazier's hit was nasty. Wasn't on a defenseless receiver so comparing it to Burfict's hit is stupid, but an unnecessary roughness penalty wouldn't have completely surprised me if the refs were trying to send a message. No reason he had to lower his head like that, legal or not. In the end, it was a legal hit by the rules because of where Bernard was, which has been verified numerous times in numerous places... I can understand 100% why Bengals fans and players didn't like it though.

The difference between Shazier's hit and Burfict's hit on Brown was the Burfict was head hunting on a player who clearly had been unable to catch the ball. You can be 100% sure that Burfict's history played a role in it - including the unnecessary dirty hit he put on Maxx Williams last week that's making the rounds now. Per the rules, one hit was legal and one wasn't, but people will see what they want to see.

Burfict's penalty put them into field goal range, but they would've had a couple more cracks to do that. Pac Man's penalty just made it an easier fied goal.

Shazier's hit was against the rules as well.

No, it wasn't.

Yes it was you cannot lead with the crown of your helmet outside the tackle box. A nfl.com link was posted a few pages back explaining this.

Share the link? To my understanding, its legal to make helmet to helmet contact on a runner.ETA-Found the link; I stand corrected; begs the question: why have no RBs been flagged for this? I've seen countless examples of RBs lowering their heads & iniating contact w/the crown. I'm sure some had to be outside the tackle box.

 

[belljr]

Can we all stop pretending that Porter had any intentions of checking on Brown? He was on the other side of the field where Bengals players were talking to a ref. He had a plan, knew what he was doing and executed it perfectly. Did nobody see the Steelers player jump like a kindergartener when the flag flew? They knew exactly what they were doing.

He was in the center of the field

 

[belljr]

Burfict hit is a penalty.

Porter being in the mix and the jones lunge getting a penalty is insane.

Completely joke

Was it a joke that the Bengals didn't get 15 yard penalties when Burfict and Hill (among others) charged onto the field after Shazier's hit on Bernard? They had no business being on the field or approaching anyone out there since they weren't involved in the play.Porter was out there initially to check on Brown, which the officials granted him permission to do because of the nature of the injury. Like or not, doesn't matter. Knowing him, I'm sure he had plenty to say about the hit, but it took a childish response from Jones to be penalized. He could've just talked back to Porter and said anything he wanted and nothing would've been done, but he instead chose to try and go THROUGH THE REF to push or hit him? Seriously? And all Porter did was talk with a smirk on his face, hands in his pockets.

The refs were allowing a lot of talking. Pac Man got penalized for the physical contact, especially with the ref.

I think Shazier's hit was nasty. Wasn't on a defenseless receiver so comparing it to Burfict's hit is stupid, but an unnecessary roughness penalty wouldn't have completely surprised me if the refs were trying to send a message. No reason he had to lower his head like that, legal or not. In the end, it was a legal hit by the rules because of where Bernard was, which has been verified numerous times in numerous places... I can understand 100% why Bengals fans and players didn't like it though.

The difference between Shazier's hit and Burfict's hit on Brown was the Burfict was head hunting on a player who clearly had been unable to catch the ball. You can be 100% sure that Burfict's history played a role in it - including the unnecessary dirty hit he put on Maxx Williams last week that's making the rounds now. Per the rules, one hit was legal and one wasn't, but people will see what they want to see.

Burfict's penalty put them into field goal range, but they would've had a couple more cracks to do that. Pac Man's penalty just made it an easier fied goal.

Shazier's hit was against the rules as well.

No, it wasn't.

Yes it was you cannot lead with the crown of your helmet outside the tackle box. A nfl.com link was posted a few pages back explaining this.

Share the link? To my understanding, its legal to make helmet to helmet contact on a runner.

2013 rule change

 

[SIDA!]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

 

[Toomuchnv]

Can't

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

You left out the part about the coach instigating the other team. No one argued for a flag solely for his being on the field. You have to look at how he conducted himself out there. Bottom line is it should have been a flag, what impact it might have had we'll never know. ETA: Has a coach ever been flagged for instigating another team? Yes, Munchak earlier in the game.

You have video of Porter instigating other players? The video I saw showed Porter standing there with his mouth shut being swarmed by Bengals.

I'll just assume that seeing how he is being fined he most likely did something to stir the fire?

Because the NFL has a history of punishing actions correctly 100% of the time? That's a pretty risky assumption.

What if it comes out that he was fined for being on the field? You still going to claim he was instigating without proof?

 

[Pipes]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Burfict hit is a penalty.

Porter being in the mix and the jones lunge getting a penalty is insane.

Completely joke

Was it a joke that the Bengals didn't get 15 yard penalties when Burfict and Hill (among others) charged onto the field after Shazier's hit on Bernard? They had no business being on the field or approaching anyone out there since they weren't involved in the play.Porter was out there initially to check on Brown, which the officials granted him permission to do because of the nature of the injury. Like or not, doesn't matter. Knowing him, I'm sure he had plenty to say about the hit, but it took a childish response from Jones to be penalized. He could've just talked back to Porter and said anything he wanted and nothing would've been done, but he instead chose to try and go THROUGH THE REF to push or hit him? Seriously? And all Porter did was talk with a smirk on his face, hands in his pockets.

The refs were allowing a lot of talking. Pac Man got penalized for the physical contact, especially with the ref.

I think Shazier's hit was nasty. Wasn't on a defenseless receiver so comparing it to Burfict's hit is stupid, but an unnecessary roughness penalty wouldn't have completely surprised me if the refs were trying to send a message. No reason he had to lower his head like that, legal or not. In the end, it was a legal hit by the rules because of where Bernard was, which has been verified numerous times in numerous places... I can understand 100% why Bengals fans and players didn't like it though.

The difference between Shazier's hit and Burfict's hit on Brown was the Burfict was head hunting on a player who clearly had been unable to catch the ball. You can be 100% sure that Burfict's history played a role in it - including the unnecessary dirty hit he put on Maxx Williams last week that's making the rounds now. Per the rules, one hit was legal and one wasn't, but people will see what they want to see.

Burfict's penalty put them into field goal range, but they would've had a couple more cracks to do that. Pac Man's penalty just made it an easier fied goal.

Shazier's hit was against the rules as well.

No, it wasn't.

Wrong. There's a very limited space where you're allowed to lead with the crown of your helmet.

 

[ROCKET]

Can't

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

You left out the part about the coach instigating the other team. No one argued for a flag solely for his being on the field. You have to look at how he conducted himself out there. Bottom line is it should have been a flag, what impact it might have had we'll never know. ETA: Has a coach ever been flagged for instigating another team? Yes, Munchak earlier in the game.

You have video of Porter instigating other players? The video I saw showed Porter standing there with his mouth shut being swarmed by Bengals.

I'll just assume that seeing how he is being fined he most likely did something to stir the fire?

Because the NFL has a history of punishing actions correctly 100% of the time? That's a pretty risky assumption.

What if it comes out that he was fined for being on the field? You still going to claim he was instigating without proof?

Well it seems like the masses have come to conclusions regarding guilt recently when it comes to the league and their less than ideal cases against certain teams/individuals. I guess I'll just bury my head in the sand, ignore evidence and take their word for it.

 

[belljr]

Why was there not an excessive celebration penalty after the int?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Why was there not an excessive celebration penalty after the int?

Why was there not 6 of them?

 

[sho nuff]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.

There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

 

[Toomuchnv]

Can't

Has a flag for a coach coming on the field been thrown before during an injury timeout?

You left out the part about the coach instigating the other team. No one argued for a flag solely for his being on the field. You have to look at how he conducted himself out there. Bottom line is it should have been a flag, what impact it might have had we'll never know. ETA: Has a coach ever been flagged for instigating another team? Yes, Munchak earlier in the game.

You have video of Porter instigating other players? The video I saw showed Porter standing there with his mouth shut being swarmed by Bengals.

I'll just assume that seeing how he is being fined he most likely did something to stir the fire?

Because the NFL has a history of punishing actions correctly 100% of the time? That's a pretty risky assumption.What if it comes out that he was fined for being on the field? You still going to claim he was instigating without proof?

Well it seems like the masses have come to conclusions regarding guilt recently when it comes to the league and their less than ideal cases against certain teams/individuals. I guess I'll just bury my head in the sand, ignore evidence and take their word for it.

What evidence? The only visible evidence is Porter standing there with his mouth shut.Could he have said something prior to the video shot? Sure....

Could he have not said anything and certain Bengals players were acting like thugs? Sure...

I'm just not going to assume the first scenario is absolutely true without proof. Especially given some of the Bengals players actions in previous games specifically Burfict and Jones.

Again, what if it comes out that Porter was fined for just being on the field? Are you still going to go with the he instigated stance therefore Jones running over the official should be excused?

 

[SIDA!]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing. And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

 

[moondog]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

 

[belljr]

Marvin Lewis Said I guess they deemed that a hit to the head. I didn't see it

Lol

 

[Arodin]

Why was there not an excessive celebration penalty after the int?

Because the celebration occurred out of the field of play?

I thought the rule only applied to on-field celebrations and the use of props. Of course they revise it every few years, so I may be remembering an older version.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

Outstanding post

And who's fault is it? Who has caused this Civil War?

 

[Pipes]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I don't think the refs even knew the rule. Mike Perrera didn't. There is also a ton of ambiguity when determining what constitutes a catch.

 

[DallasDMac]

32 pages, at least 20 of which are discussing officials and calls. This was my point earlier. It's what the NFL has become.

 

[knowledge dropper]

As a lifelong Bengals fan I'm much happier these last few years watching them fight fire with fire than I was watching them get bullied and cheap shotted into oblivion for 40 years.

They just need to learn when to use it, and how to turn it off. Can not wait for this game next year.

Exactly. It was fine when Palmer got injured or Kevin Huber, but now the Bengals got the tough guy and all of a sudden it's out of control? Classic bully syndrome.

Decleating two guys trying to make a tackle is a cheap shot?

Pretty sure he got fined for that hit as he went crown of the helmet to the punter's head. Plays like that is why this series has gotten so dirty.

 

[knowledge dropper]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I don't think the refs even knew the rule. Mike Perrera didn't. There is also a ton of ambiguity when determining what constitutes a catch.

What stinks is they can review for a fumble but have to ignore the crown of the helmet hit. It's silly.

 

[sho nuff]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing. And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

 

[SIDA!]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing. And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.

It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing.And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.

It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

Coaches come onto the field for injuries a ton. Never a flag.

 

[knowledge dropper]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Looks like he is trying to wrestle the ball free for a scoop and score. The dude is really in the Steelers kitchen.

 

[Politician Spock]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing.And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.

It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

A lot of the confusion came from the two announcers not knowing what they were talking about, not only about the plays you are talking about, but they just royally sucked in general announcing that game.

The rest of the confusion comes from fan bias persuading people to see what they want to see, and not see what they don't want to see.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Looks like he is trying to wrestle the ball free for a scoop and score. The dude is really in the Steelers kitchen.

Thats all you see him do with that knee? Sure.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Looks like he is trying to wrestle the ball free for a scoop and score. The dude is really in the Steelers kitchen.

I agree.

Also, on an unrelated note, I'm looking forward to "The People vs. OJ Simpson" on FX. I know that OJ was just carving some pumpkins when two people jumped into his blade, but I really want to see how they dramatize it.

 

[cockroach]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Looks like he is trying to wrestle the ball free for a scoop and score. The dude is really in the Steelers kitchen.

Yea, the zooming in on the knee is disingenuous. He was trying to jerk the ball out... the knee to the shoulder was incidental.

 

[stbugs]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Looks like he is trying to wrestle the ball free for a scoop and score. The dude is really in the Steelers kitchen.

I agree. Also, on an unrelated note, I'm looking forward to "The People vs. OJ Simpson" on FX. I know that OJ was just carving some pumpkins when two people jumped into his blade, but I really want to see how they dramatize it.

Lol. People will see what they want. Dude has a history of trying to injure opponents. Been doing that for years. Trying to wrestle the ball away doesn't require turning your body so you can "incidentally" knee the QB in the shoulder. Anybody defending this scumbag looks silly.

 

[SIDA!]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing.And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

Coaches come onto the field for injuries a ton. Never a flag.

This is true. And in not saying there should have been a flag. But the rule wad posted earlier about coaches interacting with players on the other team.

Ultimately, my point is just because something seems clear in the rule book that doesn't mean it is clear in practice.

 

[SIDA!]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing.And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

A lot of the confusion came from the two announcers not knowing what they were talking about, not only about the plays you are talking about, but they just royally sucked in general announcing that game.The rest of the confusion comes from fan bias persuading people to see what they want to see, and not see what they don't want to see.

One of the announcers has probably called and watched hundreds of games.

The other announcer is a,super bowl winning quarterback and they also had a forever referee helping out.

If those three can't clear it up for the fans then there is a problem with the rule and how the league has provided guidance on it.

 

[Politician Spock]

This is the state of football today.

A multipage cluster#### between guys who have watched football their entire lives and they can't even come to an agreement about what constitutes a legal tackle in a sport that is often referred to as "tackle football".

Two major plays and there is this much ambiguity.

It just occurred to me that I really have no idea how to explain the rules of this game to somebody who isn't familiar with it.

This

Not really.There is zero ambiguity...both the Shazier hit and Burfict hits were illegal...and both should have been flagged. Both will be fined.

Refs miss calls in full speed real time

I've seen numerous plays they have gotten wrong even after watching replays because the rules are so confusing.And this thread is proof that fans are confused about the rules.

But I will put you down as a vote for the "Rules of the NFL are clearer and easier to understand".

When it comes to illegal hits. Yes, both being discussed are clearly defined.

And yet sports talk all across the country is littered with fans arguing over whether are not both were legal, both were illegal or one wasn't and the other was.It is clearly defined that Porter should have been flagged based on the rules...but he wasn't.

I'm having a,hard time understanding why you are saying there is no confusion about these things when there are literally pages of members here unable to reach a consensus.

We haven't even gotten into the bs of what does and does not constitute a catch.

A lot of the confusion came from the two announcers not knowing what they were talking about, not only about the plays you are talking about, but they just royally sucked in general announcing that game.The rest of the confusion comes from fan bias persuading people to see what they want to see, and not see what they don't want to see.

One of the announcers has probably called and watched hundreds of games.

The other announcer is a,super bowl winning quarterback and they also had a forever referee helping out.

If those three can't clear it up for the fans then there is a problem with the rule and how the league has provided guidance on it.

Again, the rule the refs ignored that caused them to lose control of the game first appeared in 2013. I agree that even veterans of the sport struggle with this new rule, because it's human nature to reject change. The refs on the other hand are paid to know, understand and enforce the latest set of league rules. The rule itself isn't unclear. The rule doesn't need fixed. The refs screwed up. And yes I agree, the league needs to address why they screwed up, so it doesn't happen again.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

Can we all stop pretending that Porter had any intentions of checking on Brown? He was on the other side of the field where Bengals players were talking to a ref. He had a plan, knew what he was doing and executed it perfectly. Did nobody see the Steelers player jump like a kindergartener when the flag flew? They knew exactly what they were doing.

Watch it again... As brown is helped up by 3 trainers, porter is standing right behind the third trainer and burfict was to his left... Burfict reaches out to touch brown on the shoulder (presumably to make sure he's ok) and in the process is kinda leaning over the third attendant/trainer who is standing behind brown... That attendant (probably thinking burficts intentions aren't good) kind of pushes burficts right arm away and as burfict steps back his arm gets real close to porters face/right shoulder area... Joey starts jawing with burfict at that point (prolly talking before that too) and burfict kind of walks around to the front of porter and then saunters to joeys left side... Joey continues jawing and turns to his left which happens to be toward the Bengal sideline... At this point brown and the attendants are closer to sideline and now joey is kind of surrounded by Bengals... Wallace gillberry (not jones) initially bumps into joey from behind and a few refs hustle toward the grouping just as the camera feed gets switched to marvin Lewis on the sideline... From there you can't see much until they show Adam Jones bumping into ref as he tries to get to joey....Should porter be on the field... Prolly not... But from what I saw a coach was surrounded by many opposing team members and as the refs tried to keep the peace pac man decided he needed to make his presence known

Can't really say much more than that

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

I don't understand the hate on the second flag. What are we just okay with players getting into physical confrontations with COACHES now? You do that, next thing you're gonna have is some football version of Pedro Martinez throwing old man Zimmer down.

It should have been offsetting ​IMO, assistant coaches do not belong on the field to begin with. I see rule changes coming.

Apparently there already is a rule that says coaches can't go on the field for injury timeouts Rule 13 Article 2. Of course the rule was never enforced. Schefter is saying Porter will be fined for his conduct. Once again the refs spit the bit in a big moment.

Kinda like when they allowed Pete Carroll to challenge a play without throwing a red challenge flag in a game against Pittsburgh earlier this yr? Spit the bit on that one?

 

[Neofight]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Kids been like this since his days at ASU, at least. Probably started in the womb.

 

[parasaurolophus]

From Profootballtalk - video of burfict driving his knee into BenR shoulder on the sack.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/10/burfict-gave-ben-the-business-on-shoulder-injuring-sack/

Kids been like this since his days at ASU, at least. Probably started in the womb.

I dont think that was intentional.

However, anybody else agree there was a punch here at 2:26:12 of this video?

 

[HughHoney]

Can we all stop pretending that Porter had any intentions of checking on Brown? He was on the other side of the field where Bengals players were talking to a ref. He had a plan, knew what he was doing and executed it perfectly. Did nobody see the Steelers player jump like a kindergartener when the flag flew? They knew exactly what they were doing.

Watch it again... As brown is helped up by 3 trainers, porter is standing right behind the third trainer and burfict was to his left... Burfict reaches out to touch brown on the shoulder (presumably to make sure he's ok) and in the process is kinda leaning over the third attendant/trainer who is standing behind brown... That attendant (probably thinking burficts intentions aren't good) kind of pushes burficts right arm away and as burfict steps back his arm gets real close to porters face/right shoulder area... Joey starts jawing with burfict at that point (prolly talking before that too) and burfict kind of walks around to the front of porter and then saunters to joeys left side... Joey continues jawing and turns to his left which happens to be toward the Bengal sideline... At this point brown and the attendants are closer to sideline and now joey is kind of surrounded by Bengals... Wallace gillberry (not jones) initially bumps into joey from behind and a few refs hustle toward the grouping just as the camera feed gets switched to marvin Lewis on the sideline... From there you can't see much until they show Adam Jones bumping into ref as he tries to get to joey....Should porter be on the field... Prolly not... But from what I saw a coach was surrounded by many opposing team members and as the refs tried to keep the peace pac man decided he needed to make his presence known

Can't really say much more than that

Yes Burfect was checking to see if AB was ok. https://twitter.com/colin_dunlap/status/686310990015774720

 

[knowledge dropper]

It is pretty funny and ironic that Steelers fans are going through the Burfict sack video like the Zapruder Film to find wrongdoing. Most of the rules in effect today are the direct result of the hits guys like Harrison and Ward had been doing for years. The Steelers have played dirty for over twenty years and now you want to point fingers when a team punches back?

 

[fred_1_15301]

It is pretty funny and ironic that Steelers fans are going through the Burfict sack video like the Zapruder Film to find wrongdoing. Most of the rules in effect today are the direct result of the hits guys like Harrison and Ward had been doing for years. The Steelers have played dirty for over twenty years and now you want to point fingers when a team punches back?

It's pretty funny that you're bringing up Harrison and Ward's history as if that has any relevance at all on this particular discussion.