(01-11-2016, 01:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Brad, the video shows that after Burfict made his attempt to reach out and was smacked away by the trainer, Porter turned around to say something, breaking away from the group leading Brown off. Really, just stopping while they kept going. It was at this point that Gilberry bumped Porter towards Burfict and the other Bengals that had started gathering there. This what the video clearly shows.

I'm with JS that Porter should have been flagged, but you're turning this into something it wasn't.

Porter was provoking the situation, that's not me turning it into anything, it's just what it is.

Burfict was reaching out to Pat Brown in apology because, even though he wasn't trying to hurt him, he hurt him, even though I'm pretty sure Brown was faking it.

(01-11-2016, 01:41 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Porter was provoking the situation, that's not me turning it into anything, it's just what it is.

Burfict was reaching out to Pat Brown in apology because, even though he wasn't trying to hurt him, he hurt him, even though I'm pretty sure Brown was faking it.

There are at least two examples of Bengals acting inappropriately in that video.  One had noting to do with Porter, and the other involved a Bengal who had to walk several yards to him to shove him from behind.    

Admit it: neither side looks good here.  

(01-11-2016, 01:41 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Porter was provoking the situation, that's not me turning it into anything, it's just what it is.

Burfict was reaching out to Pat Brown in apology because, even though he wasn't trying to hurt him, he hurt him, even though I'm pretty sure Brown was faking it.

I never said Porter didn't provoke anything, though Porter is not the one that shoved Burfict away from Brown. I'm only pointing out that he was not away from the group with Brown, he was not in a huddle of Bengals players. He turned to say something as Brown continued to be led off the field and was then surrounded by players. We don't know what was said by anyone down there, so who started what back and forth at that point is unknown. Porter shouldn't have been there, he should've been flagged for that. But a lot of people here are trying to use Porter to absolve the players that lost it, and that's not acceptable. They are responsible for their own actions.

(01-11-2016, 08:34 AM)GMDino Wrote:

You continue to show your ignorance. Pick a better pic of when a coach shouldn't be on the field. 

If there's a scrum, coaches always come onto the field to break it up and get their players on the sideline where they belong. 

If there's an injury timeout, assistant coaches that are not trainers should not be on the field, in the middle of opposing players, after your injured player walks off the field, running their mouth. 

Smarten up a bit.

(01-11-2016, 11:37 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: You forgot a coach who has the ball on the Steelers 26 yard line and is too incompetent to recognize the safe way to win that game.  

Kneel
Kneel
Kneel  (Steelers out of time outs)
Kick field goal

Undisciplined and therefore he has players that are undisciplined.

Can't dispute any of this. Though i would change the kneel X3 to both hands on the ball and go down on first contact...kind of what he was doing all game long, save i think, one run.

(01-11-2016, 11:59 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: The ball would have been on the 47 with 1-10 and 18 seconds to gain roughly 10 yard to put Boswell well within his range.

In the wet conditions, every yard counts.

(01-11-2016, 12:05 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: another meltdown?

Hold on a sec...i thought i was the one that was supposed to be having the drunken rage meltdown? That's what 6 keeps telling me. 

(01-11-2016, 01:44 PM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: There are at least two examples of Bengals acting inappropriately in that video.  One had noting to do with Porter, and the other involved a Bengal who had to walk several yards to him to shove him from behind.    

Admit it: neither side looks good here.  

So then why were the Steelers handed the game and not penalized in any way?

I love when Steelers fans argue against themselves 

(01-11-2016, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I never said Porter didn't provoke anything, though Porter is not the one that shoved Burfict away from Brown. I'm only pointing out that he was not away from the group with Brown, he was not in a huddle of Bengals players. He turned to say something as Brown continued to be led off the field and was then surrounded by players. We don't know what was said by anyone down there, so who started what back and forth at that point is unknown. Porter shouldn't have been there, he should've been flagged for that. But a lot of people here are trying to use Porter to absolve the players that lost it, and that's not acceptable. They are responsible for their own actions.

He turned into a bunch of players so that he was surrounded.

He had no business being where he was on the field.  If the players had time to surround him, then he was there too long and was definitely starting shit.  If they didn't, then he walked into a place where he shouldn't have been.

No one is trying to absolve the players, but what we're asking is why is there never any repercussions for the things that Steelers players do?

(01-11-2016, 02:51 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So then why were the Steelers handed the game and not penalized in any way?

I love when Steelers fans argue against themselves 

He turned into a bunch of players so that he was surrounded.

He had no business being where he was on the field.  If the players had time to surround him, then he was there too long and was definitely starting shit.  If they didn't, then he walked into a place where he shouldn't have been.

No one is trying to absolve the players, but what we're asking is why is there never any repercussions for the things that Steelers players do?

Saying there were no repercussions for the actions of the Steelers would hold more meaning if up until that point in the game the Steelers hadn't been penalized 4 more times for 93 more yards.

(01-11-2016, 02:51 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So then why were the Steelers handed the game and not penalized in any way?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=400820428

Penalties:

Steelers: 10-142
Bengals: 8-79 (6-49 before the boneheaded plays by Burfict and Jones)

(01-11-2016, 02:45 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Hold on a sec...i thought i was the one that was supposed to be having the drunken rage meltdown? That's what 6 keeps telling me. 

Are you off the wagon, dude? That gif is clearly a temper tantrum, not a drunken rage. 

Here's you

(01-11-2016, 03:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: http://espn.go.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=400820428

Penalties:

Steelers: 10-142
Bengals: 8-79 (6-49 before the boneheaded plays by Burfict and Jones)

It's funny because they showed the 10 penalties for 142 yards graphic before those plays. Anyone who thinks the Steelers weren't penalized is on crack.

(01-11-2016, 02:44 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: In the wet conditions, every yard counts.

Or as your wife tells you, "in the wet conditions, every quarter of an inch counts". 

(01-11-2016, 03:07 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Are you off the wagon, dude? That gif is clearly a temper tantrum, not a drunken rage. 

Here's you

Stop it. 

I don't waste my drink like that. Not when there's plenty of furniture around to throw.

(01-11-2016, 03:09 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's funny because they showed the 10 penalties for 142 yards graphic before those plays. Anyone who thinks the Steelers weren't penalized is on crack.

And other than the PF on Foster (for, uh, moving his foot after it was stepped on?) I'm not arguing them.

I *do* think that had the officials thrown a couple (any) 15 yarders on the Bengals for some of the post whistle stuff maybe the game calms down.

But then I look at Burfict and Jones and realize there were going to do something stupid sooner or later.

(01-11-2016, 03:16 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Stop it. 

I don't waste my drink like that. Not when there's plenty of furniture around to throw.

ok, fine. This can be you

(01-11-2016, 03:17 PM)GMDino Wrote: And other than the PF on Foster (for, uh, moving his foot after it was stepped on?) I'm not arguing them.

I *do* think that had the officials thrown a couple (any) 15 yarders on the Bengals for some of the post whistle stuff maybe the game calms down.

But then I look at Burfict and Jones and realize there were going to do something stupid sooner or later.

maybe not use the same ineffective officiating crew as last time.

(01-11-2016, 04:09 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: maybe not use the same ineffective officiating crew as last time.

Wasn't the entire same crew, was it?

Same head official but an "all-star" crew I thought?

Either way they blew this early and often.

ZERO of which means the two calls at the end were bad or wrong.

Just because this is where the whole Burfict/Porter/Jones discussion has been.

(01-11-2016, 03:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Saying there were no repercussions for the actions of the Steelers would hold more meaning if up until that point in the game the Steelers hadn't been penalized 4 more times for 93 more yards.

(01-11-2016, 03:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: http://espn.go.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=400820428

Penalties:

Steelers: 10-142
Bengals: 8-79 (6-49 before the boneheaded plays by Burfict and Jones)

How many of the penalties called against the Steelers were as phantom, as biased, and as game-changing as the last two on the Bengals?