01-02-2016, 02:46 AM
(01-01-2016, 05:38 PM)McC Wrote: 1.) The whole problem is that what he did in the past is so ridiculously irrelevant. The guy in the striped shirt is there to enforce fair play. When you look at a guy's number and then throw the flag, you have violated the covenant. The flag gets thrown based on what was done, not by who did it.
2.) Maybe the league sees him as an added source of revenue. He sure seems to have a target on his back and that cannot in any way be construed as within the rules. They act like crooked cops.
3.) And then the further problem is that sometimes it gets flagged, sometimes it doesn't. What the hell is up with that?
As to the specific incident, it's like a basketball game when two guys have the ball tied up and both are trying to wrench it away from the other. When one guys lets go, the other guy often drops like a rock. There was no unnecessary roughness.
1.) You writing this almost as fact. Like we've all established that the clearly targeted him because of who he was and not by the action. I disagree with that. It's a bang-bang play that gets called both ways quite often. When it happens in front of the other teams bench and it's late in the game and it's clear the runner is going out of bounds to stop the clock it probably gets called more. Unless you can prove the ref singled him out then I'm not sure what point you're making here.
2.) Yeah, the league that makes billions of dollars of year is looking an extra couple hundred grand in fines from a specific player as a legitimate revenue stream. It's all part of some master plan. Yup, and rather than just arbitrarily spread the fines across the league, where it's less noticeable they decided to target a single player. Does this theory come with a tin foil hat?
3.) Welcome to sports that have human beings making split second calls. Sometimes fouls are called and sometimes they aren't. Sometimes strike zones are extended and sometimes they're not. Sometimes yellow cards are given and sometimes they're not. They're all judgement calls that can vary.
There is no crazy hidden agenda. Had any of us seen that play occur between a random Texans player and a player from the Bills i can guarantee you that no one would be driven to serve it up as talking point about the Texans player being clearly targeted. Not one single person would say shit. You'd watch like every other play like that and either think nothing at all about the flag, or you think it was a close call. And then move on.
Just admit the fact many of you are incredibly biased. That's what this is. It was not that bad of a flag. And yeah, if you play the way he does and are known for being aggressive or dirty or whatever side you fall on, the refs might be more mindful of what is going on after the whistle. That's not a Vontaze Burfict thing or a Bengals thing. It's a common sense thing. All the more reason to not ***** shove the guy when he's clearly going out of bounds.
Stupid play. End of story.
