Myles Garrett suspended indefinitely

[Dome]

11 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Let's say you and I get into an argument at a bar and I shove you and you shove me back.  Then you break a beer bottle and stab me with it.  You are still guilty of whatever crime the stabbing would be under state law even if I shoved you first.  

I understand and agree with this.

I would like to add, if the guy broke the bottle and brandished it as a weapon and you kept engaging him anyways before being stabbed I probably wouldn’t consider you a victim but the losing participant of the fight.

courts be damned, here. 
just looking at the court of public opinion, not the real one 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Dome

[pnies20]

6 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Let's say you and I get into an argument at a bar and I shove you and you shove me back.  Then you break a beer bottle and stab me with it.  You are still guilty of whatever crime the stabbing would be under state law even if I shoved you first.  

Depends on the circumstances. Obviously in the static environment you described, yes. There’s several factors involved here, though. 

1. It’s not a knife 

2. Rudolph was potentially injuring genitals (I know you all think this is controversial)

3. Rudolph continued to be an aggressor after separation

4. Garrett was surrounded my multiple people that Garrett also viewed as aggressors.

This isn’t cut and dry. I just don’t think Rudolph should press this based on his actions. 

[Scoremore]

1 hour ago, Starless said:

Without bringing politics into it, I firmly believe that Rudolph was the instigating party. There's video of him trying to pull Garrett's helmet off, and it would be 100% consistent with Rudolph's character to have said and done other things to provoke Garrett throughout the course of the game. 

Garrett deserves a multi-game suspension but Rudolph deserves to be punished as well.

Keep hearing this.  It's simply false.  Mason took 2 straight sacks leading up to this play.  He was getting hit by 2 guys.  He threw the ball and one let off.  Garrett decided to wrap him in a bear hug and take him to the ground well well well after the ball was out.  Don't blame Rudolph for being pissed.  OK so then he was grabbing at his helmet and trying to get him off.  So Garrett just goes ballistic.  No it was bush league I am sorry.  Garrett laid a completely unnecessary hit that is what precipitated it all.  I am watching this play over and over and over.  Watch it a few times without brown glasses on.  BTW 6 Steelers were injured.  2 WR sufferred helmet to helmet hits.  3 guys out with concussions.  Garrett started it.

[oldman9er]

1 minute ago, pnies20 said:

This isn’t cut and dry. I just don’t think Rudolph should press this based on his actions. 

So you feel Mason "had it coming", and "got what he deserved." 

Is that your testimony today, sir? 

[pnies20]

Just now, oldman9er said:

So you feel Mason "had it coming", and "got what he deserved." 

Is that your testimony today, sir? 

Yes because that’s what I said. I said there are several mitigating factors.

[Ragnarok]

4 minutes ago, pnies20 said:

Depends on the circumstances. Obviously in the static environment you described, yes. There’s several factors involved here, though. 

1. It’s not a knife 

2. Rudolph was potentially injuring genitals (I know you all think this is controversial)

3. Rudolph continued to be an aggressor after separation

4. Garrett was surrounded my multiple people that Garrett also viewed as aggressors.

This isn’t cut and dry. I just don’t think Rudolph should press this based on his actions. 

The first point isn't relevant because it is a weapon of some sort.  Knife, gun, brick, helmet, whatever.  

I'm not saying Rudolph is blameless by any means, but you do have to look at the totality of the circumstances.

[pnies20]

4 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

Keep hearing this.  It's simply false.  Mason took 2 straight sacks leading up to this play.  He was getting hit by 2 guys.  He threw the ball and one let off.  Garrett decided to wrap him in a bear hug and take him to the ground well well well after the ball was out.  Don't blame Rudolph for being pissed.  OK so then he was grabbing at his helmet and trying to get him off.  So Garrett just goes ballistic.  No it was bush league I am sorry.  Garrett laid a completely unnecessary hit that is what precipitated it all.  I am watching this play over and over and over.  Watch it a few times without brown glasses on.  BTW 6 Steelers were injured.  2 WR sufferred helmet to helmet hits.  3 guys out with concussions.  Garrett started it.

False. Hit wasn’t late or dirty. Ref standing feet behind watching. Arm still in follow through, 1 step or less taken, wrapped up and taken down to his side.

 

😴

[pnies20]

Just now, Ragnarok said:

The first point isn't relevant because it is a weapon of some sort.  Knife, gun, brick, helmet, whatever.  

I'm not saying Rudolph is blameless by any means, but you do have to look at the totality of the circumstances.

It’s very relevant. 

Rank in order which one you’re most scared of someone standing near you with

1. Gun 

2. Knife

3. Brick

 

 

 

 

 

 

75? Helmet

 

Level of fear is relevant in cases of assault. Rudolph obviously wasn’t in fear because he came after Garrett a second time. 

[pnies20]

I’m now imagining a scene of Garrett chasing Rudolph around the field with Rudolph’s helmet in the air.

[Dome]

2 minutes ago, oldman9er said:

So you feel Mason "had it coming", and "got what he deserved." 

Is that your testimony today, sir? 

“No sir that’s not my testimony. “ is what the response would be, since he never said that.

It’s your turn again 

1 minute ago, pnies20 said:

False. Hit wasn’t late or dirty. Ref standing feet behind watching. Arm still in follow through, 1 step or less taken, wrapped up and taken down to his side.

 

😴

If a fight doesn’t break out, nobody even thinks twice about that sack IMO

its the type of RTP call that people love to hate 99% of the time

[Ragnarok]

1 minute ago, pnies20 said:

It’s very relevant. 

Rank in order which one you’re most scared of someone standing near you with

1. Gun 

2. Knife

3. Brick

 

 

 

 

 

 

75? Helmet

 

Level of fear is relevant in cases of assault. Rudolph obviously wasn’t in fear because he came after Garrett a second time. 

Not relevant in a criminal context.  Deadly weapon is a deadly weapon.  

Level of fear is more relevant in self-defense.  Usually whether an individual was in fear of death or serious bodily injury.  

For instance, here is the TN Criminal Code 

(a)  A person commits aggravated assault who: 

     (1)  Intentionally or knowingly commits an assault as defined in § 39-13-101 and: 

          (A)  Causes serious bodily injury to another; or 

          (B)  Uses or displays a deadly weapon; or 

     (2)  Recklessly commits an assault as defined in § 39-13-101(a)(1), and: 

          (A)  Causes serious bodily injury to another; or 

          (B)  Uses or displays a deadly weapon.

Level of fear by the assaulted isn't relevant.  It can be relevant in battery cases.

[Scoremore]

9 minutes ago, pnies20 said:

False. Hit wasn’t late or dirty. Ref standing feet behind watching. Arm still in follow through, 1 step or less taken, wrapped up and taken down to his side.

 

😴

It took him 3 seconds after the ball was released to get him to the ground.  I know I counted.  He had him in a bear hug and wrestled him to the ground.  It was chicken crap.  The ref you speak of was looking away on the play.   I call BS...it was completely unnecessary and yes it was dirty.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Scoremore

[Dome]

3 minutes ago, pnies20 said:

I’m now imagining a scene of Garrett chasing Rudolph around the field with Rudolph’s helmet in the air.

Someone mentioned the Browns cutting Garrett and the Steelers signing him

Garrett making sudden movements around Mason all the time just to get him to flinch “nah I’m just kidding bud...... RAAAAAH! ..... no I’m kidding I’m kidding, I’m sorry.”

mason just sits there with a fake smile acting like he’s having fun with this little game too

would be an excellent commercial once everybody hugs and makes up 

[pnies20]

1 minute ago, Ragnarok said:

Not relevant in a criminal context.  Deadly weapon is a deadly weapon.  

Level of fear is more relevant in self-defense.  Usually whether an individual was in fear of death or serious bodily injury.  

For instance, here is the TN Criminal Code 

(a)  A person commits aggravated assault who: 

     (1)  Intentionally or knowingly commits an assault as defined in § 39-13-101 and: 

          (A)  Causes serious bodily injury to another; or 

          (B)  Uses or displays a deadly weapon; or 

     (2)  Recklessly commits an assault as defined in § 39-13-101(a)(1), and: 

          (A)  Causes serious bodily injury to another; or 

          (B)  Uses or displays a deadly weapon.

Level of fear by the assaulted isn't relevant.  It can be relevant in battery cases.

It Actually is relevant in proving whether or not someone was justified in using that level of force.

if you really want to delve into this pm me. If not good chat.

[JaguarCrazy2832]

Absolutely deserved but still surprised and disappointed Mason didnt get a game