Golden Tate fined $21k for block on Sean Lee (1 Viewer)

[Clifford]

Am I the only one who saw absolutely nothing wrong with that block?

 

[sho nuff]

"The league office says the block was illegal because Tate launched himself into Lee, striking him in the chest and chin with the crown of his helmet."

LINK

Totally disagree if they're going to use launching as a basis. His feet were on the ground at impact. I was wrong that they'd find it illegal but their reasoning is BS.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y62/tstamper/tate.jpgI thought that was interesting. Saw it on another forum.

Interesting that you find a picture before the moment of impact as evidence.That and it points out how he was using his helmet to block (not only dangerous for the guy he is blocking but for himself too).

I said I found it interesting. Obviously he hit him low but traveled up as he hit him and his helmet hit his chin. I disagree he used his helmet to block. Looks more like he lead with his shoulder http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17zc1bjh0sfz1gif/original.gif , then again we may disagree, everyone see's different things.The main issue I have with the ruling is that Lee was "defenseless".

If it looks like shoulder to you...I think we have the crux of the problem. You can't see.Maybe its those funny glasses.

 

[autotrigger]

To those saying he was defenseless, should Tate have yelled, Hey Mr. Lee watch out! then wave at him to get his attention then make the block?

 

[ImTheScientist]

"The league office says the block was illegal because Tate launched himself into Lee, striking him in the chest and chin with the crown of his helmet."

LINK

Totally disagree if they're going to use launching as a basis. His feet were on the ground at impact. I was wrong that they'd find it illegal but their reasoning is BS.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y62/tstamper/tate.jpgI thought that was interesting. Saw it on another forum.

Interesting that you find a picture before the moment of impact as evidence.That and it points out how he was using his helmet to block (not only dangerous for the guy he is blocking but for himself too).

I said I found it interesting. Obviously he hit him low but traveled up as he hit him and his helmet hit his chin. I disagree he used his helmet to block. Looks more like he lead with his shoulder http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17zc1bjh0sfz1gif/original.gif , then again we may disagree, everyone see's different things.The main issue I have with the ruling is that Lee was "defenseless".

If it looks like shoulder to you...I think we have the crux of the problem. You can't see.Maybe its those funny glasses.

Did you read what I wrote? I agreed we disagree on the impact. The main issue I have with the ruling is that Lee was "defenseless".

 

[ImTheScientist]

To those saying he was defenseless, should Tate have yelled, Hey Mr. Lee watch out! then wave at him to get his attention then make the block?

Or he could have just let Lee kill the QB.

 

[MSULions]

"The league office says the block was illegal because Tate launched himself into Lee, striking him in the chest and chin with the crown of his helmet."

LINK

Totally disagree if they're going to use launching as a basis. His feet were on the ground at impact. I was wrong that they'd find it illegal but their reasoning is BS.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y62/tstamper/tate.jpgI thought that was interesting. Saw it on another forum.

You thought it was interesting that he was much lower a second before impact - proving that he launched himself upwards into Lee's chin with the crown of his helmet? Odd stance from a Seahawks homer.

 

[MSULions]

To those saying he was defenseless, should Tate have yelled, Hey Mr. Lee watch out! then wave at him to get his attention then make the block?

do you really think the violent collision was the only option for Tate? with the angle he was at all Tate had to do was put a hand on him and he would have gone down, or at the very least veered off enough that he was out of the play. Wilson ran out of bounds a second after the hit, so it's not like Lee was going to do anything even if he was untouched. Coupled with the fact that the ref then flagged Dallas for a "late hit" that wasn't even enough to be illegal in two hand touch and you have a ridiculously blown call. It was blatant and absurdly unnecessary. I don't care if a guy dreams of hitting someone like that their whole life - it was totally uncalled for and delivered totally illegally by driving up into his chin with the crown of his helmet. Funny how the league and every other football site seems to have reached the same conclusion, yet the Seahawks homers and a few worried about the game being too girly insist it was on the level. The back bending going on to support that silly assertion is ridiculous. This topic is exhibit 1-A of BostonFred's astute observation regarding the decline of this place. there is no debate - it's all "I'm right and you're stupid" homerism. imthescientist and madsweeney have been insufferable around here for a while. I don't understand why it's allowed to carry on.

 

[Wadsworth]

To those saying he was defenseless, should Tate have yelled, Hey Mr. Lee watch out! then wave at him to get his attention then make the block?

do you really think the violent collision was the only option for Tate? with the angle he was at all Tate had to do was put a hand on him and he would have gone down, or at the very least veered off enough that he was out of the play. Wilson ran out of bounds a second after the hit, so it's not like Lee was going to do anything even if he was untouched. Coupled with the fact that the ref then flagged Dallas for a "late hit" that wasn't even enough to be illegal in two hand touch and you have a ridiculously blown call. It was blatant and absurdly unnecessary. I don't care if a guy dreams of hitting someone like that their whole life - it was totally uncalled for and delivered totally illegally by driving up into his chin with the crown of his helmet. Funny how the league and every other football site seems to have reached the same conclusion, yet the Seahawks homers and a few worried about the game being too girly insist it was on the level. The back bending going on to support that silly assertion is ridiculous. This topic is exhibit 1-A of BostonFred's astute observation regarding the decline of this place. there is no debate - it's all "I'm right and you're stupid" homerism. imthescientist and madsweeney have been insufferable around here for a while. I don't understand why it's allowed to carry on.

 

[ImTheScientist]

"The league office says the block was illegal because Tate launched himself into Lee, striking him in the chest and chin with the crown of his helmet."

LINK

Totally disagree if they're going to use launching as a basis. His feet were on the ground at impact. I was wrong that they'd find it illegal but their reasoning is BS.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y62/tstamper/tate.jpgI thought that was interesting. Saw it on another forum.

You thought it was interesting that he was much lower a second before impact - proving that he launched himself upwards into Lee's chin with the crown of his helmet? Odd stance from a Seahawks homer.

I don't see the correlation between Seahawks homer and Tates checkbook? I prefer they play dirty, hit hard...... If they were known as the dirtiest thug filled team in the league I would be happy.