+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Rival Talk (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 (/thread-4907.html)
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
Your spin will continue until you think that you have convinced everybody that the game was legit.
It wasn't and we all know it.
Ultimately the NFL got Brady vs Manning one last time so I would imagine that they are happy with that match up.
It's not just Bengals fans that came to the same conclusion. Give up everybody knows whats up.
P.S. I don't always worry about my grammar in these dicussions. My bad.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 12:00 PM)michaelsean Wrote: What I'm saying is it looks like you can enforce two penalties against a team if one of them is against an official. Meaning one isn't declined and one accepted, but both can be accepted.
Yes
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 12:04 PM)tigerseye Wrote: Your spin will continue until you think that you have convinced everybody that the game was legit.Yes because reading the rules and applying them properly is spin.
It wasn't and we all know it.
Ultimately the NFL got Brady vs Manning one last time so I would imagine that they are happy with that match up.
It's not just Bengals fans that came to the same conclusion. Give up everybody knows whats up.
P.S. I don't always worry about my grammar in these dicussions. My bad.
Only in Cincinnati.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
The Steelers coaches need to read the rule book. It covers their conduct during games.
Because reading the rules and applying them properly is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE spin.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 12:19 PM)tigerseye Wrote: The Steelers coaches need to read the rule book. It covers their conduct during games.
Has ZERO to do with the topic of the thread and only serves to obfuscate what it is about.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - BigPapaKain - 01-22-2016
Short answer - the refs should've done their job and kept the coaches where the needed to be. Then Porter isn't in a situation where Gilberry can touch him and Adam Jones doesn't bullrush a ref trying to tell the refs that he doesn't belong on the field.
It's done with. As I said before; that entire game is a black eye on the integrity of the game and the men who referee it, and all the players and coaches involved in the game.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
Your coach shouldn't have been on the field in the first place. The refs admitted they messed up in their handling of the situation.
Your coach created and incited the situation. So if the refs would have given the Steelers the extra 15 yards for their purposely breaking the rules they would have been rewarding the Steelers for their cheating .
The refs in hind site now know what the Steelers were up to and would not have given multiple penalties to the team that was being cheated.
The fact that the Steelers coach went on to the field of play to incite multiple players from the opposing team doesn't mean that ever player that he incites the Steelers are rewarded an extra 15 yards for each player. His rule breaking caused the whole mess and he should have been the only one flagged because he was the instigater to the whole thing.
So your theory is lets cheat and we will get 15 yards for everyone of their players that gets pissed off.(Sounds about right)
Ok with your reasoning Porter should have been flagged multiple times. One more time than however many times you make up that the Bengals players should have been flagged because Porter initiated the whole thing.
Your trying to spin spin spin, just like your coaches did with the rules.
Shame on them.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - rfaulk34 - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 11:41 AM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Im not sure what you are asking but I'm just addressing what I've seen written and heard on talk shows about how Joey Porters penalty should have offset (or canceled out) Jones penalty, if they had called one on JP; and how JPs fine is an admission that one should have been called.
Depends a lot on when the flag is thrown. If if's thrown earlier, then instead of Pacman bumping the ref, he's jumping up and down like DeCastro did.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 01:53 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Depends a lot on when the flag is thrown. If if's thrown earlier, then instead of Pacman bumping the ref, he's jumping up and down like DeCastro did.
Well that would depend on what the "missed" flag on Porter would have been for. Being on the field or jawing with Burfict as he was walking off of the field with Brown.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 01:05 PM)tigerseye Wrote: Your coach shouldn't have been on the field in the first place. The refs admitted they messed up in their handling of the situation.Assuming everything that you wrote above the bolded is true, please read back a few posts. This has already been addressed. If someone commits a foul, you are not given free reign to retaliate. The Peko example is well stated.
Your coach created and incited the situation. So if the refs would have given the Steelers the extra 15 yards for their purposely breaking the rules they would have been rewarding the Steelers for their cheating .
The refs in hind site now know what the Steelers were up to and would not have given multiple penalties to the team that was being cheated.
The fact that the Steelers coach went on to the field of play to incite multiple players from the opposing team doesn't mean that ever player that he incites the Steelers are rewarded an extra 15 yards for each player. His rule breaking caused the whole mess and he should have been the only one flagged because he was the instigater to the whole thing.
So your theory is lets cheat and we will get 15 yards for everyone of their players that gets pissed off.(Sounds about right)
Ok with your reasoning Porter should have been flagged multiple times. One more time than however many times you make up that the Bengals players should have been flagged because Porter initiated the whole thing.
Your trying to spin spin spin, just like your coaches did with the rules.
Shame on them.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 01:05 PM)tigerseye Wrote: Ok with your reasoning Porter should have been flagged multiple times. One more time than however many times you make up that the Bengals players should have been flagged because Porter initiated the whole thing.Translation....
"I don't care what you say or what the rules are, I think that it should have worked out in the Bengals favor and I'll throw any irrational shit against the wall and see what sticks in order to make my opinion true."
Show me the rule that states once you've committed a foul a player is allowed to retaliate without penalty.
I've given rules. You've given what you think should have happened despite what the rules say.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 12:56 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Short answer - the refs should've done their job and kept the coaches where the needed to be. Then Porter isn't in a situation where Gilberry can touch him and Adam Jones doesn't bullrush a ref trying to tell the refs that he doesn't belong on the field.
It's done with. As I said before; that entire game is a black eye on the integrity of the game and the men who referee it, and all the players and coaches involved in the game.
Eh....kinda.
If you read the rules Porter was actually allowed to be out there. The refs are allowed give permission to a coach and it's often a courtesy that they extend. It's not common, but coaches have gone to the injured players side in that situation before.
I will give you that they should have been aware of Porter being a firecracker and made him leave. They dropped the ball on that one. And likewise they probably should have recognized the potential volatility regardless of Porters presence and made the 5 Bengals who were mulling around the injured Brown move as well.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
Your actually proving the point that Porter was just out there to stir it up in order to get a flag which is cheating and against the rules.
With your reasoning Porter should have had multiple fouls called on him for going after several of our players.
You were handed a present, just accept it.
We have.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
Everybody but you has admited that Porter had no reason to be out there.
Sorry you lose.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - 6andcounting - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 04:55 PM)tigerseye Wrote: Your actually proving the point that Porter was just out there to stir it up in order to get a flag which is cheating and against the rules.
With your reasoning Porter should have had multiple fouls called on him for going after several of our players.
You were handed a present, just accept it.
We have.
Porter didn't go after anybody. He had his hands in his pockets pretty much the whole time. He was walking off the field with brown and the trainers and when Burfict accidently hit him in the face. Dingleberry ran over and started pushing Porter. Then Adam Dumbass Jones flies in out of nowhere just to push a ref.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - rfaulk34 - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 04:32 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Well that would depend on what the "missed" flag on Porter would have been for. Being on the field or jawing with Burfict as he was walking off of the field with Brown.
The popular video out there (cant link it right now--on my ipad) shows one ref in the middle of the players for 5 full seconds before pacman bumps the third ref that steps in. That means the first ref stepped in before those five seconds and started to try and separate the group. All of this happened after Brown was walking off the field and Porter stayed behind.
He could have flagged Porter for unsportsmanlike conduct at least five seconds before Pacman stepped in, for hanging back and engaging the players. Granted, that would have been a little sketchy because separating the group first is the logical thing to do. Pacman made it moot by flying in and doing what he did. Still, a flag there would have been justified due to the atmosphere of that and the previous game.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - jason - 01-22-2016
(01-21-2016, 07:34 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: http://uaasnfl.blob.core.windows.net/live/1807/2015_nfl_rule_book_final.pdf (pg 65)
A foul against an official is not part of a Multiple Foul and will be enforced in addition to any other foul.
Not trying to start shit or beat a dead horse, but with all that I've heard and read about the Pac Man/Porter penalty I thought that I'd look it up myself in the rulebook. I know the first reaction is going to be that Porter should have been called and the NFL admitted this when fining Porter and even though the don't truly offset, they should cancel each other out....Move it forward 15 for Jones and then back 15 for Porter. But....the NFL also fined Wallace Gillberry for his part in the festivities on the field. So in fining Gillberry the NFL admits that it should have called a penalty on him as well. In this case his and Porters penalties would have offset and the Jones penalty stands alone as per the rules and the ball ends up being spotted exactly where it was.
I'd post this in the JN form but I know that it is against the rules for me to do so, plus Im sure it would go over like a fart in church there.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - rfaulk34 - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 04:52 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Eh....kinda.
If you read the rules Porter was actually allowed to be out there. The refs are allowed give permission to a coach and it's often a courtesy that they extend. It's not common, but coaches have gone to the injured players side in that situation before.
You can say that until you're blue in the face. Everyone knows what Porters intent was when he went on the field and it wasnt, primarily, to check on brown.
Hell, if checking on Brown was his intent, why not let every single assistant coach on the field while a player is injured. Its not like hes the linebacker coach, or whatever. Of course he'd be out there checking on a wide receiver. :GMDinoeyeroll:
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - tigerseye - 01-22-2016
This thread was ridiculous.
I'm glad I was part of it.
RE: Rule 14 Section 1 Article 3 Exception 1 - StrictlyBiz - 01-22-2016
(01-22-2016, 04:55 PM)tigerseye Wrote: Your actually proving the point that Porter was just out there to stir it up in order to get a flag which is cheating and against the rules.
With your reasoning Porter should have had multiple fouls called on him for going after several of our players.
You were handed a present, just accept it.
We have.
Let's just ignore Rule 13 Section 1 Article 2 that states:
Either or both team attendants and their helpers may enter the field to attend their team during a team timeout by either team. No other non-player may come on the field without the Referee’s permission, unless he is an incoming substitute
and assume that Porter was out there to stir up shit illegally. I'm still waiting for you to show me the rule that states that once a player commits a foul, other players are free to commit fouls against that player without incurring a penalty themselves.
Again I have done nothing but quote rules and you haven't been able to cite a single rule to support your assertions.
So please, show me the rule.