The Myles Garrett incident

[Mr Raider]

4 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I did the wear it while playing the field, but not when batting.

Yeah, even the guys that I knew that wore one every game usually hated batting with them on. Some would anyway, others would take it out. 

I'd say 85% of catchers I know wore cups, 50% of infielders didn't, and I didn't play with any outfielders that wore them regularly. 

Coaches always suggested wearing them, even at bat, but I can't say I ever personally saw anyone take a pitch to the jewels, its much more likely you'll take it in the small of your back from turning away from it. It's happened at times in the bigs, but it's just not so common that a lot of guys won't go up to bat without a cup. 

[Dome]

Apparently booger went out of his way to say that this is the same head that got hit when mason had his concussion earlier.

THE SAME HEAD AS BEFORE GUYS

 

looking for source, this seems too good to be true 

[lolsurebro]

2 minutes ago, Dome said:

Apparently booger went out of his way to say that this is the same head that got hit when mason had his concussion earlier.

THE SAME HEAD AS BEFORE GUYS

 

looking for source, this seems too good to be true 

Booger and his infinite wisdom he sheds upon us. We are truly blessed to be allowed such insight.

That man is insufferable sometimes.

[Fureys49ers]

5 minutes ago, warfelg said:

IIRC the fight or flight issue tends to come up in life or death type situations.  Are we trying to say that either (1) Garrett thought Mason was going to kill him or (2) his fight or flight trigger is very low.

Preach! This crazy phantom manhood strike narrative has run too far

[Mr Raider]

7 minutes ago, warfelg said:

IIRC the fight or flight issue tends to come up in life or death type situations.  Are we trying to say that either (1) Garrett thought Mason was going to kill him or (2) his fight or flight trigger is very low.

That's how most people view it, and thats the most serious case, and when your physical response is at it's highest, but fight or flight can happen on smaller scales too... If you're afraid of dogs and see one in public that's barking at you, your heart rate can rise, blood pressure rises, breathing rate, etc. Your body dumps adrenaline into your blood stream and you become much more aware and focused on your surroundings. It can be even smaller things too, but your physical response happens on a smaller level. It's a misconception that fight or flight only kicks in in life or death situations. 

Edit: That isn't to say I think that's what we're dealing with from Garrett's reaction, because if he did have a physical response to the situation it wasnt soooo much that he was acting purely on instinct and couldn't have reeled it in. I mean its not the first scrum we've seen in football and most of the time cooler heads prevail. I'm just talking in a general sense. 

Edited November 16, 2019 by Mr Raider

[Soko]

13 minutes ago, Mr Raider said:

That's how most people view it, and thats the most serious case, and when your physical response is at it's highest, but fight or flight can happen on smaller scales too... If you're afraid of dogs and see one in public that's barking at you, your heart rate can rise, blood pressure rises, breathing rate, etc. Your body dumps adrenaline into your blood stream and you become much more aware and focused on your surroundings. It can be even smaller things too, but your physical response happens on a smaller level. It's a misconception that fight or flight only kicks in in life or death situations. 

Edit: That isn't to say I think that's what we're dealing with from Garrett's reaction, because if he did have a physical response to the situation it wasnt soooo much that he was acting purely on instinct and couldn't have reeled it in. I mean its not the first scrum we've seen in football and most of the time cooler heads prevail. I'm just talking in a general sense. 

I think it can happen in other, non-life threatening scenarios...

[Manny/Patrick]

1 hour ago, warfelg said:

Eh, I never did at WR or playing Lacrosse even though in both sports it was "required".  Slowed me down too much.  I would guess he might not have.

 

Anyways, here's a reverse angle of the "grab":

That Nike glove is Mason's left hand.

No seeing anything here, this is how my cousins shake hands

[warfelg]

26 minutes ago, Manny/Patrick said:

No seeing anything here, this is how my cousins shake hands

Well people did ask them to kiss and make up.

[hornbybrown]

As much as I think Rudolph should of at least got a week suspension it’s a pretty harsh punishment for the Steelers having him still available to play

[Shady Slim]

i know that there was a bit of talk that he should be charged and others countered saying that it would be too far, and let the boys play etc

but just as an aside under australian tort law rudolph would definitely have a lawsuit and at that a successful won under the precedent of giumelli v johnston - consent works as a defense to battery allowed for under the rules of the game, as well as acts contrary to the rules but common to the game, but not when they’re so contrary and outside the scope of the game’s rules they can’t be seen to being consented to

now i don’t know american tort law

and yes i’ve got my torts exam monday and this is great procrastination

but nonetheless that’s my ten cents on the court arguments 

[Dome]

3 minutes ago, Shady Slim said:

i know that there was a bit of talk that he should be charged and others countered saying that it would be too far, and let the boys play etc

but just as an aside under australian tort law rudolph would definitely have a lawsuit and at that a successful won under the precedent of giumelli v johnston - consent works as a defense to battery allowed for under the rules of the game, as well as acts contrary to the rules but common to the game, but not when they’re so contrary and outside the scope of the game’s rules they can’t be seen to being consented to

now i don’t know american tort law

and yes i’ve got my torts exam monday and this is great procrastination

but nonetheless that’s my ten cents on the court arguments 

if this was australia there's a 50/50 chance one of them would've been packed away by dingos as an infant and none of this would've happened. 

so in a way, it's your fault. 

[Dome]

4 minutes ago, Shady Slim said:

i know that there was a bit of talk that he should be charged and others countered saying that it would be too far, and let the boys play etc

but just as an aside under australian tort law rudolph would definitely have a lawsuit and at that a successful won under the precedent of giumelli v johnston - consent works as a defense to battery allowed for under the rules of the game, as well as acts contrary to the rules but common to the game, but not when they’re so contrary and outside the scope of the game’s rules they can’t be seen to being consented to

now i don’t know american tort law

and yes i’ve got my torts exam monday and this is great procrastination

but nonetheless that’s my ten cents on the court arguments 

How would australia take into consideration Mason going after Garrett twice before Garrett struck him? Non-starter because of the egregiousness of using  a helmet as a weapon?

[Shady Slim]

5 minutes ago, Dome said:

How would australia take into consideration Mason going after Garrett twice before Garrett struck him? Non-starter because of the egregiousness of using  a helmet as a weapon?

falls in to the category of “acts contrary to the rules but common to the game”, guys get in to scraps like that all the time - if garrett had just used fists and they had a slap fight it would’ve been all above board even if an injury had resulted because that’s contrary to the game but still a reasonably foreseeable risk of participating, and as such an obvious risk a player is taken to have consented to

i think the more marginal question is if pouncey’s actions could’ve been taken to be a normal and impliedly consented to although contrary risk of the game or a battery, and i would probably lean to the latter tbh

Edited November 16, 2019 by Shady Slim

[EvilenFroggen]

I really wish there'd be a 30 for 30 style show or article on this incident now, instead of years later or more likely never.  I want to know what was going through people's heads on the sidelines or across the field when it happened.  "And I thought oh my god, did he just actually DO that?"  "We knew we were in for a really awkward time in the locker room."

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

1 hour ago, Dome said:

Apparently booger went out of his way to say that this is the same head that got hit when mason had his concussion earlier.

THE SAME HEAD AS BEFORE GUYS

 

looking for source, this seems too good to be true 

But was he wrong?