Tez on Refs: "They obviously have it out for me"

[Shake n Blake]

Tez is one of my top 3 favorite (best) players on this team. His impact on the defense is tremendous. I don't mind some of the chippiness from him as I feel like it gives the team an edge sometimes. That said, he loses his head sometimes and that's why the refs have an eye on him. It'll probably remain that way for the rest of his career, unforunately.

[Daddy-O]

(12-29-2015, 11:37 PM)Utts Wrote: How have I never seen this!? Just incredible. Tez is such a talent, but such a scumbag on the field. I wonder what he's like off the field, for real.

By the looks of it he gave #82 a love tap to the family jewels.

[Aquapod770]

(01-01-2016, 12:25 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Honestly, the refs were pretty awful all around, but the biggest awfulness came in favor for the Bengals (this is coming from a Bengals fan).

When they set the ball and the Bengals lined up for the next snap before then FINALLY calling a penalty for a facemask? Yeah, that's BS. If that happened to the Bengals rather than for the Bengals, I would have been enraged, so it was awful. Then combine that with the McCarron fumble challenge (that should have been ruled a fumble, but was ruled an inomplete pass) was also awful. It was a fumble, even though I was hella happy that it wasn't ruled as such, even though it became meaningless when he fumbled it again anyway.

I'll agree that it was a super late flag, but it was an obvious facemask that should have been called way earlier. 


Side note: did anyone else notice how quickly they were blowing the whistle when broncos players were getting tackled compared to Bengals players. I think on the first sack of the game they blew the whistle as soon as Osweiler got touched. 

[jfkbengals]

(01-01-2016, 11:55 AM)Aquapod770 Wrote: I'll agree that it was a super late flag, but it was an obvious facemask that should have been called way earlier. 


Side note: did anyone else notice how quickly they were blowing the whistle when broncos players were getting tackled compared to Bengals players. I think on the first sack of the game they blew the whistle as soon as Osweiler got touched. 

He's a QB with an existing shoulder injury who was fully in the grasp.  They're going to blow that dead every time unless it is a Big Jen type who has shown a repeated ability to muscle his way out of the situation.  They are going to protect the QB.

[McC]

(12-29-2015, 08:16 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: I lost all respect for him after reading his comments.  There were multiple whistles before he shoved him down out of bounds, but he wants to say "they have it in for me" instead of admitting his guilt.  

This is the same dumb shit excuse James Harrison had when he kept getting flagged and fined for head shots.

Quit being a dumb ass making dirty plays and you won't get flagged for it!

But he didn't shove him down.  He let go of the ball and the guy flopped.   It was a bad call.

Officiating has been bad for a while but this year it has been beyond horrendous. A call should be a call because it was an infraction, not because of the who the player is.

The level of officiating is an embarrassment to the league. Bunch of 60 year olds clamoring for attention.

[jfkbengals]

(01-01-2016, 02:39 PM)McC Wrote: But he didn't shove him down.  He let go of the ball and the guy flopped.   It was a bad call.

Officiating has been bad for a while but this year it has been beyond horrendous.  A call should be a call because it was an infraction, not because of the who the player is.

The level of officiating is an embarrassment to the league.  Bunch of 60 year olds clamoring for attention.

But he did!  Keep playing out of bounds and after clear whistles and you WILL get called.

[McC]

(01-01-2016, 03:00 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: But he did!  Keep playing out of bounds and after clear whistles and you WILL get called.

When you're locked up in a tug of war with another guy who isn't stopping, you won't stop either.  They were both scrapping so it should have been a no call.  The other guy fell because Burfict let go first...if I'm remembering it right.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-01-2016, 04:45 PM)McC Wrote: When you're locked up in a tug of war with another guy who isn't stopping, you won't stop either.  They were both scrapping so it should have been a no call.  The other guy fell because Burfict let go first...if I'm remembering it right.

Burfict did extend his arms but i still wouldn't call it a shove. Looked more like a flop. And there's no doubt that the ref looked at Burfict for a second before pulling the flag. More times than not, that's a no call.

[McC]

(01-01-2016, 04:54 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Burfict did extend his arms but i still wouldn't call it a shove. Looked more like a flop. And there's no doubt that the ref looked at Burfict for a second before pulling the flag. More times than not, that's a no call.

Yep.  And if you're calling things differently for different guys, then you suck and deserve to be fired, imo.  It goes against the very role of the job.

[Wes Mantooth]

This is such a ridiculous statement all multiple levels.

1.) That penalty at the end of the game gets called quite a bit. If I had to throw a guess out there I'd see you'd a similar play get flagged about 60-70% of the time, and about 99.9% of the time when the offensive player is QB going out of bounds.

So, no I don't think they were singling him out at all. It's not as as if you never see that get flagged. It happens quite frequently. I understand it's a bang-bang play, and I get that the league is different now than it used to be. But welcome to 2016. Those are the rules now. Don't hit a guy out of bounds.

2.) Let's just say he is right. That they are "targeting him" or "have it in for him". And let's just presume that he (Tez) is of aware of this truly believes it, as his comments suggest.

WHY ON EARTH ARE HITTING PEOPLE LATE WHEN YOU KNOW THE REFS HAVE IT IN FOR YOU?

His conduct certainly doesn't seem to that of someone who knows they're on thin ice. Because if he were to truly believe that then he wouldn't have done any number of things the last few weeks. Either that, or his idiot that doesn't care.

So how about you just shut up and go play. Do your best and try the best you can to not give them a reason to flag you. No twisting ankles or pushing or shoving after the whistle. Play as hard as you can as fair as you can. And if you get flagged for something many do don't go crying about it afterwards.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-01-2016, 05:17 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: This is such a ridiculous statement all multiple levels.

1.) That penalty at the end of the game gets called quite a bit.  If I had to throw a guess out there I'd see you'd a similar play get flagged about 60-70% of the time, and about 99.9% of the time when the offensive player is QB going out of bounds.

So, no I don't think they were singling him out at all.  It's not as as if you never see that get flagged.  It happens quite frequently.  I understand it's a bang-bang play, and I get that the league is different now than it used to be.  But welcome to 2016.  Those are the rules now.  Don't hit a guy out of bounds.

2.) Let's just say he is right.  That they are "targeting him" or "have it in for him".  And let's just presume that he (Tez) is of aware of this truly believes it, as his comments suggest.

WHY ON EARTH ARE HITTING PEOPLE LATE WHEN YOU KNOW THE REFS HAVE IT IN FOR YOU?

His conduct certainly doesn't seem to that of someone who knows they're on thin ice.  Because if he were to truly believe that then he wouldn't have done any number of things the last few weeks.  Either that, or his idiot that doesn't care.

So how about you just shut up and go play.  Do your best and try the best you can to not give them a reason to flag you.  No twisting ankles or pushing or shoving after the whistle.  Play as hard as you can as fair as you can.  And if you get flagged for something many do don't go crying about it afterwards.

I can't defend his inability to be unaware at that point, but i can question why the flag wasn't pulled immediately when the ref looked directly at him then pulled it, and i can say beyond the shadow of a doubt, i've seen many plays in many games where there was a tussle out of bounds, one player goes down, and no flag is thrown.

[McC]

(01-01-2016, 05:17 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: This is such a ridiculous statement all multiple levels.

1.) That penalty at the end of the game gets called quite a bit.  If I had to throw a guess out there I'd see you'd a similar play get flagged about 60-70% of the time, and about 99.9% of the time when the offensive player is QB going out of bounds.

So, no I don't think they were singling him out at all.  It's not as as if you never see that get flagged.  It happens quite frequently.  I understand it's a bang-bang play, and I get that the league is different now than it used to be.  But welcome to 2016.  Those are the rules now.  Don't hit a guy out of bounds.

2.) Let's just say he is right.  That they are "targeting him" or "have it in for him".  And let's just presume that he (Tez) is of aware of this truly believes it, as his comments suggest.

WHY ON EARTH ARE HITTING PEOPLE LATE WHEN YOU KNOW THE REFS HAVE IT IN FOR YOU?

His conduct certainly doesn't seem to that of someone who knows they're on thin ice.  Because if he were to truly believe that then he wouldn't have done any number of things the last few weeks.  Either that, or his idiot that doesn't care.

So how about you just shut up and go play.  Do your best and try the best you can to not give them a reason to flag you.  No twisting ankles or pushing or shoving after the whistle.  Play as hard as you can as fair as you can.  And if you get flagged for something many do don't go crying about it afterwards.

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.

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.

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.

[jfkbengals]

Stop with this "he looked at his number first" argument.  The guy was reaching for the flag the entire time he was turning, and he is supposed to look at the number.  They have to know who they are calling it on.

[McC]

BTW, dirty player and penalty machine that he is, Burfict has 4 penalties this year. Seems like a dirty player might have more.

Also seems like a guy being targeted would have more, so maybe he is just being paranoid.

The play Monday, imo, shouldn't have been a penalty. Sometimes it will be called, sometimes it won't--further evidence of the terrible-ness of the combination of the rule book and the people enforcing it. Since they're humans, you will always have error and misinterpretation or even just varying interpretations. Kinda like the wide array of strike zones in MLB.

[McC]

(01-01-2016, 02:52 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Tez is one of my top 3 favorite (best) players on this team. His impact on the defense is tremendous. I don't mind some of the chippiness from him as I feel like it gives the team an edge sometimes. That said, he loses his head sometimes and that's why the refs have an eye on him. It'll probably remain that way for the rest of his career, unforunately.

Don't really see him changing at this point.  He is who he is.  Really though, the old striped guys have no right to have their eye on anyone.

[Wes Mantooth]

(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.

[BengalsRocker]

(01-02-2016, 02:46 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: 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.

Well said there WM.

No agenda.  Just common sense.

[McC]

(01-02-2016, 02:46 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: 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.

You said one thing that was right.  We all have bias.  Mine is toward the Bengals.  Yours is against.  That is the end of the story.  And hey, why say something that can be said in twenty words when you can use twenty paragraphs, right?  Talk about a ***** windbag. 

I say the sky is blue.  Now you say, in a thousand words, why it is not.

[muskiesfan]

If the referees are targeting Burfict, he brought it on himself. He needs to control himself and mature as a player. All of the extracurricular stupid shit he does has given him the reputation he has. He did it to himself.

[jfkbengals]

(01-01-2016, 05:38 PM)McC Wrote: 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.

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.

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.

All fines are donated to charity, so he isn't bringing them any more revenue.