Game #4 - Patriots vs Buffalo Bills 9/29/2019

[redseat]

We still fighting on this thread I see

 

[Yankee Traveler]

We still fighting on this thread I see

Like siblings told to stop bickering and do their chores....

 

[nefansince75]

We still fighting on this thread I see

Discussing, discussing, discussing.

 

[YankeeRebel]

We still fighting on this thread I see

Actually I haven't responded in a while. You get to point where you realize what your dealing with and conclude it's just best to leave it alone.

 

[nefansince75]

Actually I haven't responded in a while. You get to point where you realize what your dealing with and conclude it's just best to leave it alone.

What a crock. Your statement above is as much an argument as any. "It's not me, it's them". The truth is your platform has only one plank and that's the result of the play. If you had more you'd add it.

I don't like the result either but the only way to stop it is to change the rules so use of any force is banned outside the box. If it means conceding a first, well everyone plays by the rules too. This would protect receivers who are lit up just to separate them from the ball.

What you can't do is decide a play is bad based on the result.

 

[YankeeRebel]

What a crock. Your statement above is as much an argument as any. "It's not me, it's them". The truth is your platform has only one plank and that's the result of the play. If you had more you'd add it.

I don't like the result either but the only way to stop it is to change the rules so use of any force is banned outside the box. If it means conceding a first, well everyone plays by the rules too. This would protect receivers who are lit up just to separate them from the ball.

What you can't do is decide a play is bad based on the result.

Actually the point I was making Miss Demeanor is that you can only argue opinion for so long then it all becomes a futile effort.

 

[Southieinnc]

Discussing, discussing, discussing.

That's out of line.....

 

[Southieinnc]

What a crock. Your statement above is as much an argument as any. "It's not me, it's them". The truth is your platform has only one plank and that's the result of the play. If you had more you'd add it.

I don't like the result either but the only way to stop it is to change the rules so use of any force is banned outside the box. If it means conceding a first, well everyone plays by the rules too. This would protect receivers who are lit up just to separate them from the ball.

What you can't do is decide a play is bad based on the result.

Damn, NE. I can't figure out if you are really offended or not.
Usually you are one of the most level headed here.....

 

[nefansince75]

Damn, NE. I can't figure out if you are really offended or not.
Usually you are one of the most level headed here.....

I'm not offended at all. I get Reb and his point and anyone who initially judges that play more by the result than the entirety of play. It's Friday and no fine have been levied so the NFL seems not think there was anything wrong with the hit. Sure he got a penalty, but refs can make mistakes. If he had been even close to at fault the NFL would have validated the penalty with a fine.

With each reply we are responding to the poster and the entire board. Since most of my posts on this topic have multiple likes and winners I've been encouraged to keep responding.

All is good as is my view of everyone and all the posts in this thread.

 

[YankeeRebel]

Damn, NE. I can't figure out if you are really offended or not.
Usually you are one of the most level headed here.....

I suspect it's PMS

Patriots
Martyrdom
Syndrome

 

[nefansince75]

I suspect it's PMS

Patriots
Martyrdom
Syndrome

That's funny, however, just because my opinion matches a homer perspective doesn't make it wrong. Just because you neuter your homerism does not make yours any more right.

 

[YankeeRebel]

That's funny, however, just because my opinion matches a homer perspective doesn't make it wrong. Just because you neuter your homerism does not make yours any more right.

It's not so much neutering I try to remain open and objective. I saw this the same way the refs did be that right or wrong. If I see something that way I will defend it until I feel there is no rational in taking it any further.

 

[nefansince75]

It's not so much neutering I try to remain open and objective. I saw this the same way the refs did be that right or wrong. If I see something that way I will defend it until I feel there is no rational in taking it any further.

But I doesn't seem like you have done that at all. It seems you judged the first sight (as did the refs) and threw your flag, but won't review the play. The head of officiating reviewed it and at least stated nothing warranted an ejection. Further, even a minor safety violation is met with a league fine, yet no fine has followed.

 

[DIKOWT DOWG]

it was a damn good game. the upside as i see it is the bills know they are can get better.

 

[YankeeRebel]

But I doesn't seem like you have done that at all. It seems you judged the first sight (as did the refs) and threw your flag, but won't review the play. The head of officiating reviewed it and at least stated nothing warranted an ejection. Further, even a minor safety violation is met with a league fine, yet no fine has followed.

So you just want to keep this going? You must have played with yourself a lot as a child, I suggest you do that again.

Move on folks nothing to see here.

 

[nefansince75]

So you just want to keep this going? You must have played with yourself a lot as a child, I suggest you do that again.

Move on folks nothing to see here.

Are you a politician? While you give answers, they never are to questions that were asked.

 

[YankeeRebel]

Are you a politician? While you give answers, they never are to questions that were asked.

What questions? Because I have answered questions so what is it you do not understand?

 

[nefansince75]

What questions? Because I have answered questions so what is it you do not understand?

I guess you are right, the thread itself has asked questions but not completely directed at you. And you have my apologies. Me implying you are a politician is a far worse insult than you calling me a wanker .

Just about a week later and no fine. Doesn't that 100% vindicate Jones? You did write you wouldn't be surprised to see a fine. Are you surprised by the lack of fine?

 

[YankeeRebel]

I guess you are right, the thread itself has asked questions but not completely directed at you. And you have my apologies. Me implying you are a politician is a far worse insult than you calling me a wanker .

Just about a week later and no fine. Doesn't that 100% vindicate Jones? You did write you wouldn't be surprised to see a fine. Are you surprised by the lack of fine?

No it absolutely does not vindicate Jones not in the least. IMO he still initiated the H2H Contact not Allen who was in the process of being tackled or going to the ground. He was still called for the penalty and I feel that was the correct decision. I am a bit surprised he was not fined, but not being fined or suspended does not vindicate him, it does not mean he did not commit the foul. He should be grateful there were off setting penalties.

 

[nefansince75]

No it absolutely does not vindicate Jones not in the least. IMO he still initiated the H2H Contact not Allen who was in the process of being tackled or going to the ground. He was still called for the penalty and I feel that was the correct decision. I am a bit surprised he was not fined, but not being fined or suspended does not vindicate him, it does not mean he did not commit the foul. He should be grateful there were off setting penalties.

This is my entire opinion on the matter.

For several years the league has been fining players for dangerous plays. The lack of a fine is vindication. Allen may have been in the process of being tackled but he was also in the process of picking up a first down. Jones' job is to stop first downs. He did his job. He also turned his shoulder to prevent the h2h but Allen's momentum was more than he could avoid. Again, Allen's forward momentum was the primary cause of the h2h.

There was no foul by either team, despite the fact that one was called. Both players had right to the space and both filled it responsibly and a h2h was an incidental byproduct of the action. There was an injury which was caused by two players each deciding to engage aggressively. Each player is responsible for themselves, therefore Allen was responsible for his own injury.

Unless there's a rule that says the defense has to give the right of way to the offense, Jones did no wrong.