About the Joey Porter thing

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-13-2016, 08:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't disagree with anything you just posted.  What I'm pointing out is that Wheaton continued to move in the same direction he was running when he made the catch, this doesn't allow for a clean break for anyone watching the play from his catching the ball to his getting hit.  Again, and I've said over the years I don't like this, that hit is going to get flagged about 9O% of the time in today's NFL.  I'll also restate that Gio turned upfield, which to an official is a clear indicated that he is in control and able to protect himself.  You're also ignoring the other points I made about why it wasn't flagged.  Again, it may not be right, correct or fair but it's today's NFL.  If the hits had occurred with the teams reversed in each instance the calls would remain the same.

I agree that, if reversed, it's called the same way. There's no conspiracy here. I highlighted that part of your post because you felt Wheaton had not made a football move and was in a defenseless position. 3 steps + bracing for contact = a football move and in a defensive position. 

I don't want to keep debating whether Gio was in a defenseless position because that's not the applicable rule. Shazier dropped his head and made contact with the crown of his helmet. It's a completely different rule. I don't like the "defenseless rule" the way it is now because there's too much contact that's incidental or unavoidable and i don't think it's right that a defender is 100% responsible to not hit a receiver in the head or neck area. They can lower their target area and if a receiver drops down, there's going to be "illegal contact" every time. It's blatantly unfair and to the offenses benefit.

If the situation were reversed, i'd feel that the Steelers were on the wrong side of the flag twice.