PDA

View Full Version : Will not be tolerated… double standard


NEWstevo
11-29-2010, 07:47 PM
NFL personal conduct policy:

Engaging in violent and/or criminal activity is unacceptable and constitutes conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the National Football League. Such conduct alienates the fans on whom the success of the League depends and has negative and sometimes tragic consequences for both the victim and the perpetrator.

The League is committed to promoting and encouraging lawful conduct and to providing a safe and professional workplace for its employees.

--------------------------

So, Ben’s off the field behavior was not tolerated, and Goodell said he was going to make an example of him. Verdict: Multi game suspension.

Harrison’s hard hits are not tolerated, and Goodell said he was going to make an example of him. Verdict: Highest fine this season for any player (I think). And, the threat of a suspension.

What about fighting? It’s not only against NFL Personal Conduct; it is punishable by local laws as Assault and Battery. Verdict: Boys will be boys, give them a fine equivalent to a speeding ticket to you and me.

Hell, even Tomlin is starting to get angry over this.

And did anyone else see the video of the ref reaching for his flag (on Harrison's hit) BEFORE he hit Fitzpatrick? It's like the Zapruder film of trigger happy refs head huntering Steeler players!

(man, i need a drink)

TRH
11-29-2010, 07:50 PM
yeah, its truly disgusting and was a huge and sad black eye for the NFL when that fight took place and networks all over the place are showing it over and over.
Yet, you can get fined MORE and possibly suspended for hitting someone hard on the field during play. Sickening.

SteelCityRules
11-29-2010, 08:28 PM
yeah, its truly disgusting and was a huge and sad black eye for the NFL when that fight took place and networks all over the place are showing it over and over.
Yet, you can get fined MORE and possibly suspended for hitting someone hard on the field during play. Sickening.

Nicely said. I agree. Harrison should've played in the 70's.

BigRick
11-29-2010, 10:58 PM
Nicely said. I agree. Harrison should've played in the 70's.

That would have been awesome. Imagine a linebacking crew of Harrison, Ham, Lambert, and Russell!:tt03:

Whodis
11-30-2010, 07:10 AM
I gave this double standard thing some thought and this is what needs to happen.

What happens to the Steelers and their players week after week has to happen to a team like the Jets.

Rex Ryan would not tolerate one sided calls or phantom personal foul pentalties. He would call out the NFL in his press conference and put the pressure on them. Imagine the New York media dealing with it. So the double standard will be there until you do something about it.

theplatypus
11-30-2010, 07:21 AM
You're comparing apples to oranges. The personal conduct policy is in regards to off field transgressions, not on field fights.

Whodis
11-30-2010, 07:34 AM
The personal condust policy is posted. However, the author states "Harrison’s hard hits are not tolerated". I am shedding light on the fact that this witch hunt is hurting our team. There was a football game Sunday against the Buffalo Bills where Harrison hit the QB in the chest after a 3rd down play. It damn near cost us the game.

I'm posting more toward the "double standard" and what I feel could be done to get them off our backs.

They couldn't suspend Johnson because that would be at an unfair advantage for Thursday nights game. Didn't mean to hijack the thread

grward
11-30-2010, 10:44 AM
You're comparing apples to oranges. The personal conduct policy is in regards to off field transgressions, not on field fights.

I must have missed the part where is says "off field". Are you seriously going to nitpick this and try to excuse what is taking place? If the policy does include "off field" somewhere in the wording I still don't think it matters? So if a player happens to moon the fans after a play, would this still not fall under personal conduct because it took place on the field? I guess I just don't see it as apples and organges is all. Personal conduct does not change because of your location at the time.

tony hipchest
11-30-2010, 10:52 AM
I must have missed the part where is says "off field". Are you seriously going to nitpick this and try to excuse what is taking place? If the policy does include "off field" somewhere in the wording I still don't think it matters? So if a player happens to moon the fans after a play, would this still not fall under personal conduct because it took place on the field? I guess I just don't see it as apples and organges is all. Personal conduct does not change because of your location at the time.

its not nitpicking. it is what it is.

personal conduct (by definition) implies what is done on the players Personal Time i.e. time off the field.

time on the field, or in/on nfl properties, is their professional time and the time they get paid for.

theplatypus
11-30-2010, 11:00 AM
I must have missed the part where is says "off field". Are you seriously going to nitpick this and try to excuse what is taking place? If the policy does include "off field" somewhere in the wording I still don't think it matters? So if a player happens to moon the fans after a play, would this still not fall under personal conduct because it took place on the field? I guess I just don't see it as apples and organges is all. Personal conduct does not change because of your location at the time.


On April 10, 2007, the National Football League introduced a new conduct policy to help control off-field behavior by its players and preserve the league's public image.[1] The policy, introduced by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, implements a tougher, new personal-conduct policy, and under conditions of the previous policy handed down two of the harshest suspensions in NFL history for off-field misdeeds.[2] Each player that has been suspended must reapply for reinstatement.[3] The policy only applies to the player's personal lives and image in the public spotlight. The NFL conducts separate investigations for drug and alcohol abuse and performance enhancement.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_player_conduct_controvers y

I'm not nitpicking anything. I'm saying compare apples to freaking apples. If you don't/won't/can't see the difference between what Ben allegedly did(2x) and a fight on the field then nothing anyone does or says will help.

Whodis
11-30-2010, 12:11 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_player_conduct_controvers y

I'm not nitpicking anything. I'm saying compare apples to freaking apples. If you don't/won't/can't see the difference between what Ben allegedly did(2x) and a fight on the field then nothing anyone does or says will help.

Apples to Apples

Do you think the punishment for the fight was fair compared to what has been happening to Harrison?

Apples to Apples

How do you rank this with the fine given to Seymor? A repeat offender who hit someone that wasn't engaged with him at the time.

Lets focus on the "double standard" and your opinion about it. I ask you, what would happen if a shady roughing the passer call costs the Jets the game against the Pats? What do you think the fallout will be? Do you think Rex Ryan will say "we need to work on tackling technique". Theres no right or wrong answer just curious what your hung up on.

theplatypus
11-30-2010, 12:30 PM
Apples to Apples

Do you think the punishment for the fight was fair compared to what has been happening to Harrison?

Apples to Apples

How do you rank this with the fine given to Seymor? A repeat offender who hit someone that wasn't engaged with him at the time.

Lets focus on the "double standard" and your opinion about it. I ask you, what would happen if a shady roughing the passer call costs the Jets the game against the Pats? What do you think the fallout will be? Do you think Rex Ryan will say "we need to work on tackling technique". Theres no right or wrong answer just curious what your hung up on.

Apparently you and I have different ideas as to what makes an apple an apple, but anyway.

I've got no problems with the penalty for the Finnegan vs what's his name fight. The NFL hasn't come out and warned everyone about fighting. A fight like we saw on Sunday isn't the norm, it's an anomaly. Unlike helmet to helmet hits which are dangerous and potentially life threatening. I think if the NFL really cared about player safety and helmet to helmet hits they would put them back in leather helmets. Doing so would put an end to it with a quickness.
I think that Seymour should have been suspended for sucker punching Ben. However, the calls against Harrison don't influence my opinion there. It's simply based on the fact he's done if before and there's no place for it in sports at any level(clearly I'm not referring to boxing, mma.....). As far as the call against Harrison on Sunday, I thought it was close. But, if they called a personal foul for that bs hit on Cambell the week before clearly the hit on Fitz was going to be called as well.

I'm not hung up on anything, simply pointing out that the OP is comparing apples to oranges. Regarding the remaining questions I'm not going to worry about mythical scenarios and what another teams coach would do about it. I don't want to see Tomlin up there during a press conference after a loss crying about the refs. Doing so would just make him/the Steelers look like sore losers. For every time a game is supposedly decided by a penalty I guarantee you can find 10 plays the losing team didn't make that would have changed their fortune.

Whodis
11-30-2010, 12:52 PM
Well said.

I don't agree with any of the punishment for hitting. The NFL promotes a violent game that invovles hard hits. I'm a huge hockey fan. The league tried to "clean up" it's image starting in the late 80's early 90's with bigger rinks and Europeans. To make a long story short...... The games sucked

The NFL doesn't care about player safety or well being. This is a knee jerk reaction to what they percieved as a hit to their image. They wing it week to week with fines. I felt the pentalty against Harrison in the Bills game was "HUGE"! I could look at that call and say "that changed the game".

theplatypus
11-30-2010, 01:11 PM
To me the game changing play was the last holding call against Kemo(?) w/ just over a minute left. It was 3rd and 7 the Bills had no time outs left and it negated a 17 yard completion which would have ended the game. Even then there were easily 10 plays earlier in the game that if a catch was made or a tackle was made then we wouldn't have been in that position to begin with.

TRH
11-30-2010, 02:52 PM
Well said.

I don't agree with any of the punishment for hitting. The NFL promotes a violent game that invovles hard hits. I'm a huge hockey fan. The league tried to "clean up" it's image starting in the late 80's early 90's with bigger rinks and Europeans. To make a long story short...... The games sucked

The NFL doesn't care about player safety or well being. This is a knee jerk reaction to what they percieved as a hit to their image. They wing it week to week with fines. I felt the pentalty against Harrison in the Bills game was "HUGE"! I could look at that call and say "that changed the game".


baseball has done the same thing (aiming for bigger scores, shorter fences for home runs, frowning on good pitching, etc....). And what an abysmal failure that has been. Nobody gives a f*** about baseball anymore. When someone says "baseball", you can hear the crickets chirping...(and that will only get worse as the younger people even care less about baseball)
The example of the 18-14 baseball game and the 66-49 football game has pretty much proven themselves overhyped, un-interesting and un-worthy. For some reason, Goodell hasn't learned this lesson.
I don't see what kind of "hit to their image" has to do with anything. Football has been just fine for years and years and has gained more popularity each year, and there's always been hard hitting (a major part of the appeal). Hit to their image??

Whodis
11-30-2010, 06:25 PM
I don't see what kind of "hit to their image" has to do with anything. Football has been just fine for years and years and has gained more popularity each year, and there's always been hard hitting (a major part of the appeal). Hit to their image??

I agre with what your saying %100. Image was the word used when they started to come down with fines. The kid from Rutgers? got paralyzed and conncussions were the hottest topic. The NFL has Prieber Fever and they will do what it takes to protect Brady.

BigRick
11-30-2010, 06:33 PM
Apples to Apples

Do you think the punishment for the fight was fair compared to what has been happening to Harrison?

Apples to Apples

How do you rank this with the fine given to Seymor? A repeat offender who hit someone that wasn't engaged with him at the time.

Lets focus on the "double standard" and your opinion about it. I ask you, what would happen if a shady roughing the passer call costs the Jets the game against the Pats? What do you think the fallout will be? Do you think Rex Ryan will say "we need to work on tackling technique". Theres no right or wrong answer just curious what your hung up on.

It should be apparent to every Steelers fan that the NFL ruling powers have it in for Harrison and the Steelers. After whwt has happened the last few weeks and the blatant unfairness of the fines. I used to take the bad calls with a grain of salt because they usually went against both teams. But this is getting out of hand. Dileberate sucker punches and fist fights get light fines because they don't play for the Steelers. :banging: