(02-13-2016, 04:50 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: He wasn't given permission from the refs!

(02-13-2016, 04:50 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: He wasn't given permission from the refs!

(02-13-2016, 06:52 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: The fact that he was out there for several minutes without being flagged or asked to leave implies otherwise. 

(02-14-2016, 05:40 PM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: You don't know that.  

Besides, one could argue that not being flagged implies permission from the refs.  

(02-14-2016, 05:40 PM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: You don't know that.  

Besides, one could argue that not being flagged implies permission from the refs.  

(02-14-2016, 06:35 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Or it could imply that the refs dropped the ball once again in a big moment, which it seems ironic that it always seems to go the Steelers' way.

Have you heard ANY reports saying that he was given permission from a ref?  

Even if he was, Brown was 10 yards ahead of him walking off the field and Porter wasn't even trying to keep up with him.  You'll probably post "oh, Gilberry bumped him," but that was while Porter had his back to Brown and Brown was walking off the field while Porter was talking trash to Bengals players.

Why would a linebacker's coach have been concerned enough to go get permission from the ref?  Had he never seen a football hit before?  If it was that bad, why was he the only coach out there?

Your arguments make absolutely no sense.

(02-14-2016, 09:07 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Look at it from the refs POV. Even though Porter is out there and not a trainer, he's causing no harm so why ask him to leave when he's not hurting anything? And by not asking him to leave, you are implying that it's OK. 

(02-14-2016, 09:07 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: The only time his presence became a problem was in the final 11 seconds (at most) when he was directly approached by the four Bengal players who came immediately from the bench to where Porter was. Watch the link I posted above. 

(02-14-2016, 09:07 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: The refs only "dropped the ball" when 4 Bengals made an issue of it by getting involved with the injured Steelers player and supporting staff. Why didn't Burfict, 97, 57, and 90 go to the area where 43, and 96 were standing which was several yards away from the injured Brown instead of directly to the Steelers staff? All Burfict and his band of merry men had to do was keep their distance regardless of who was out there and the Steelers don't have a lay up FG for the win.

(02-14-2016, 10:07 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The rule is in place to keep people who aren't supposed to be on the field from interfering in the game.

Porter interfered with the game.

The refs didn't ask him to leave because they weren't doing their jobs.

Your point fails.




So just because he didn't cause a problem in the first however many seconds, it makes it ok to cause a problem in the last 11 seconds?

Your point fails.
They shouldn't have had to keep their distance because Porter shouldn't have been out there.  If he was out there for Brown, why wasn't he walking off with Brown and the trainers?

And don't say "oh, Gilberry and the other Bengals stopped him," because his back was already to them and they were way ahead of him.

(02-14-2016, 10:54 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: People other than the trainers are allowed out there if given permission. Being that Porter was out there for possibly several minutes, permission is implied. It's really not that hard to understand. Again it's in the rules if you would just take the time to read them and understand them. If you want to deny that it isn't, you're not being honest with yourself, me, or anyone else who you try to convince that the refs weren't doing their jobs. You're grasping at straws. 

And regardless, had Burfict and the other 3 simply not gone to Brown and instead gone to where George Iloka and Carlos Dunlap were standing, well away from the Steelers, nothing would have happened. 

Porter was walking off of the field with Brown until Burfict stepped between Brown and the trainer and Porter and laid his hands on Brown. It's clearly on the video. To deny it or pretend like it happened differently is simply delusional. 

(02-15-2016, 04:09 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: So the NFL fined him $10,000 for doing something that was perfectly legal?

Doesn't that kind of kill your entire argument?  He didn't throw punches or anything, so why else would he have been fined?

SBNation says the fine is for being on the field, but why would they fine him if he had permission from the refs?

(02-15-2016, 10:01 AM)GMDino Wrote: Kind of off topic but I wonder if the officials were fined at all for allowing him out there?

(02-15-2016, 10:14 AM)The Real Deal Wrote: Oh god.....and brads head just exploded.

Y'all are shock jocks of this forum. Just working for reactions. I have to admit, it's funny watching people squirm. Funny and sad all at the same time.

(02-15-2016, 10:17 AM)GMDino Wrote: You know I thought that after I posted it...but I was serious.  The union doesn't tell us when/how officials are reprimanded.  So if they made this huge mistake by missing a coach on the field, or allowed it despite the atmosphere of the game at that point, or even just simply allowed it because they CAN allow it I wonder if the league would come down on them after the determined to fine Porter for doing it?

I doubt the fine officials for missed calls though.

(02-15-2016, 10:14 AM)The Real Deal Wrote: Oh god.....and brads head just exploded.

Y'all are shock jocks of this forum. Just working for reactions. I have to admit, it's funny watching people squirm. Funny and sad all at the same time.

(02-15-2016, 10:01 AM)GMDino Wrote: Kind of off topic but I wonder if the officials were fined at all for allowing him out there?

(02-15-2016, 10:17 AM)GMDino Wrote: You know I thought that after I posted it...but I was serious.  The union doesn't tell us when/how officials are reprimanded.  So if they made this huge mistake by missing a coach on the field, or allowed it despite the atmosphere of the game at that point, or even just simply allowed it because they CAN allow it I wonder if the league would come down on them after the determined to fine Porter for doing it?

I doubt the fine officials for missed calls though.

(02-15-2016, 11:15 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: Brad doesn't understand the concept, which makes him the perfect target for that approach.  

(02-15-2016, 05:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So you were serious that he wasn't allowed out there and that they blew the call, and him being out there wouldn't have even been that big of a deal had the result not been a penalty, so you disagree with everything that you and the entire Steelers nation has been arguing for this entire time.

Typical.

Nope......  I understand perfectly, it just annoys me that Steelers fans post like they're the leaders of the free world and go unchecked with their stupid posts/claims.

(02-15-2016, 04:09 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: So the NFL fined him $10,000 for doing something that was perfectly legal?

Doesn't that kind of kill your entire argument?  He didn't throw punches or anything, so why else would he have been fined?

SBNation says the fine is for being on the field, but why would they fine him if he had permission from the refs?

(02-15-2016, 05:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Nope......  I understand perfectly, it just annoys me that Steelers fans post like they're the leaders of the free world and go unchecked with their stupid posts/claims.

(02-15-2016, 06:29 PM)6andcounting Wrote: You forgot to bold and underline the important parts in size 28 text.

(02-15-2016, 06:58 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: SB Nation says the fine was for him being on the field. But they cite an Ian Rapoport tweet that says he was fined for his "actions last week." I have yet to hear anything official from the league as to specifically why Porter was fined. Those actions could be going on to the field, but they could also be for verbally engaging the Bengals players.

(02-15-2016, 07:26 PM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: That's just it: If you understood what we were doing, you wouldn't take us that seriously.  But you don't, and I'm beginning to think you never will.  

(02-15-2016, 08:38 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Way to avoid answering anything in the post