Should Suggs have been tossed?

[Midnightangel]

For those that missed it...

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...g-at-legarrette-blount-s-knees-163908126.html

"One of the NFL's most intense rivalries got really hot on Sunday night after Ravens outside linebacker Terrell Suggs dove at the back of Steelers running back LeGarrette Blount's knees at the end of a play when it was pretty clear that was unnecessary."

I saw it and thought he should have been tossed like a salad. It was clearly dirty and he was trying to injure Blount.

That being said, I'm a Steelers fan so my view is pretty biased even if I don't want it to be.

So, I'm asking non-Steelers fans what they think. Should Terrell Thugs have been tossed?

 

[HammerDown]

Terrell Suggs is a dangerous, violent man.

 

[Mondio]

I voted no, I only saw a quick bit and really didn't watch too closely, but it looked like he went higher than the knees to me. had he gone lower, there wouldn't have been much that happened to him after I wouldn't have been ok with. Suspension, fine, ejection, the recipient of a cheap shot of his own, whatever.

I do think it was dirty and a pretty decent fine is ok with me. Sure Blount wasn't down, but there was no need to do anything other than help wrap up the guy who's forward progress was clearly stopped. I know sometimes they bust out, and I don't want official too quick on the whistle either, but he could have ensured Blount was down and stopped and still been considered a football play in a lot of ways other than the dirty way he chose.

 

[redseat]

Yes tossed. Forward progress was stopped, sure Blount was not on the ground but Suggs imo clearly was targeting Blount.. He has done this in the past.

 

[Mondio]

actually, I watched it again and I'd like to change my vote. he was out of the play, he fucking gave up on it and saw an opportunity to line up and take one hell hard cheap shot, so he did. That's punk ass crap. i'd expect better for a professional competitor.

 

[Judge Fudge]

I watched this play.

No. I think there was a bias during the SNF crew here because the was blown AFTER Suggs went down to STOP A MOVING BLOUNT.

Case in point. Lynch runs into a pile of raiders yesterday. KEEPS HIS LEGS MOVING and with help from a OL (Swezzy) gets a TD.

i think it didn't warrent even a 15 yarder

but it's my opinion. Others will be different

 

[HammerDown]

Blount vs. Suggs with bare fists. I'd pay to watch that shit.

 

[Bunkamania]

Had he targeted the knees I would agree but, since it was his back that was targeted it wasn't as big of a deal as made out to be.

 

[redseat]

Had he targeted the knees I would agree but, since it was his back that was targeted it wasn't as big of a deal as made out to be.

his intentions certainly appeared to be very bad... Sure he didn't connect with his knee but it was a vicious,malicious hit imo.

 

[Judge Fudge]

Not that i'm pimping Marshawn but more evidence

 

[Mondio]

i don't think that play was anything like the one that happened last night

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I didn't think it was anywhere near his knees. It looked like he hit him pretty much square on the middle of the left butt cheek to me. It came from behind while Blount was basically stopped so I can understand the logic that it looked "cheap". But those guys are taught to play to the whistle and I don't think it had blown yet. As long as it wasn't at his knees, and I don't think it was, it should be considered a legal play.

 

[Judge Fudge]

i don't think that play was anything like the one that happened last night

the point is Lynch was bottled up and still MOVED and got a TD.

Blount was bottled up. If he still Moved he could have made a TD. Suggs was stopping him. At the Knees yes but still..............

 

[Tainthappening]

i don't think that play was anything like the one that happened last night

+1

 

[element1286]

the point is Lynch was bottled up and still MOVED and got a TD.

Blount was bottled up. If he still Moved he could have made a TD. Suggs was stopping him. At the Knees yes but still..............

Its was cheap, when do you ever see a defender in a pile in which forward progress is clearly stopped attempt to push a runner forward in any way? If he wanted to stop Blount he should have been pushing him backwards like the rest of his team.

The play was nothing like the Lynch play, Lynch's forward progress never stopped.

 

[DutchBird]

As some of the pundits (and IIRC among them Marshall Faulk) pointed out:

The 'forwards progress was stopped' argument is complete BS, simply by reason of the officials not having whistled the play dead, which they ought to do when they consider forward progress stopped. If Blount had broken free, or Steelers had decided to jump on from the other side and push the pile forward, they would have counted the result of that. And of the latter there are numerous examples, in about every single game of every single week in College and the NFL. And that despite the fact that strictly speaking pushing the pile forward in support of the runner is illegal (aiding the runner - similar to picking him up and carry him forward).

Suggs targeted the hip/but area, and not even close to the knees. Suggs went after Blount in pretty much the only way - under current NFL regulations - where he could have made the tackle without automatically incurring the 15 yard penalty and an NFL fine.


So overall:

- Should NOT have been a penalty.
- Should NOT be a fine.
- The way the impact worked out (and Blount was bent) was unfortunate, but a direct result to the way the NFL has been legislating tackling.
- If anyone is to blame for this, it is the wildly inconsistent officiating concerning forward progress (when blowing the play dead), and the leeway they tend to give the offense (both the runner as well as supporting cast) to push the pile forward form behind, aiding the runner.

 

[Mondio]

the point is Lynch was bottled up and still MOVED and got a TD.

Blount was bottled up. If he still Moved he could have made a TD. Suggs was stopping him. At the Knees yes but still..............

i watched them both again, and those plays aren't even similar in anyway other than it's a running play

 

[Judge Fudge]

As some of the pundits (and IIRC among them Marshall Faulk) pointed out:

The 'forwards progress was stopped' argument is complete BS, simply by reason of the officials not having whistled the play dead, which they ought to do when they consider forward progress stopped. If Blount had broken free, or Steelers had decided to jump on from the other side and push the pile forward, they would have counted the result of that. And of the latter there are numerous examples, in about every single game of every single week in College and the NFL. And that despite the fact that strictly speaking pushing the pile forward in support of the runner is illegal (aiding the runner - similar to picking him up and carry him forward).

Suggs targeted the hip/but area, and not even close to the knees. Suggs went after Blount in pretty much the only way - under current NFL regulations - where he could have made the tackle without automatically incurring the 15 yard penalty and an NFL fine.


So overall:

- Should NOT have been a penalty.
- Should NOT be a fine.
- The way the impact worked out (and Blount was bent) was unfortunate, but a direct result to the way the NFL has been legislating tackling.
- If anyone is to blame for this, it is the wildly inconsistent officiating concerning forward progress (when blowing the play dead), and the leeway they tend to give the offense (both the runner as well as supporting cast) to push the pile forward form behind, aiding the runner.

My point but he used more words

 

[DutchBird]

Its was cheap, when do you ever see a defender in a pile in which forward progress is clearly stopped attempt to push a runner forward in any way? If he wanted to stop Blount he should have been pushing him backwards like the rest of his team.

The play was nothing like the Lynch play, Lynch's forward progress never stopped.

Ahum, in every game there are countless occasions where the defender tackles the ball carrier in such a way to actually aid his forward progress by yards - and where the defender had ample opportunity to do it differently. So yeah, you see it often...

And what should Suggs have done? Run around the pile (and hope Blount would not escape while doing so), and place defenders and blockers between himself and the player he is trying to tackle? I hope you are not suggesting something as stupid as that....

 

[element1286]

Ahum, in every game there are countless occasions where the defender tackles the ball carrier in such a way to actually aid his forward progress by yards - and where the defender had ample opportunity to do it differently. So yeah, you see it often...

And what should Suggs have done? Run around the pile (and hope Blount would not escape while doing so), and place defenders and blockers between himself and the player he is trying to tackle? I hope you are not suggesting something as stupid as that....

He didn't tackle anyone, he speared him while in a vulnerable position.