tre'davious white in concussion protocol

[LeeEvans]

2 minutes ago, theJ said:

He didn't say it gave him the right.  He said it's understandable why he did.

There's a big difference there.

And I'm saying it isn't understandable. A couple of calls that went against him is not a reason to do what he did. It wasn't even a close game, the Pats were up 20 and halfway through the 4th quarter.

[lancerman]

3 minutes ago, theJ said:

He didn't say it gave him the right.  He said it's understandable why he did.

There's a big difference there.

THANK YOU! Some people to need to really learn how to understand what they are reading. No Patriots fan said it was right. Ever. But when one guy gets targeted and held the whole game and is getting taken down at the knees after a long injury history and is getting no calls on plays that were almost entirely defensive holdings until the DPI at the end and the only penalty that gets called is on him, they are going to get frustrated. And that sometimes boils over. It's not right to lash out. But it's understandable why he did. 

[lancerman]

1 minute ago, LeeEvans said:

And I'm saying it isn't understandable. A couple of calls that went against him is not a reason to do what he did. It wasn't even a close game, the Pats were up 20 and halfway through the 4th quarter.

Okay how about Bills players trying to take him out at the knees because they can't tackle him, with his injury history. How about he was held the entire play in front of a ref and it led to an INT. Literally every play with Gronk something a long those lines happened. Yeah it is understandable unless you've never got upset and did something stupid that you later regretted.

[LeeEvans]

Just now, lancerman said:

THANK YOU! Some people to need to really learn how to understand what they are reading. No Patriots fan said it was right. Ever. But when one guy gets targeted and held the whole game and is getting taken down at the knees after a long injury history and is getting no calls on plays that were almost entirely defensive holdings until the DPI at the end and the only penalty that gets called is on him, they are going to get frustrated. And that sometimes boils over. It's not right to lash out. But it's understandable why he did. 

Dude Gronk was not being targeted by the Bills, get that crap out of here. The dude is 6'7 and 270 pounds there's no way you a corner or safety is taking him down by tackling him above the waist 

[theJ]

Just now, INbengalfan said:

Did you kick your opponent while he was laying prone on the ground?  I certainly hope not (as it might taint your mod status  ).

 

This isn't a bang-bang play like your analogy suggests.

Kick?  No.  For example - playing basketball once a guy was being a rough, hold jerseys, hand slapping, etc.  Refs called none of it.  I had a fast break, and got hacked from behind.  No foul.  So going the other way on the same play, he made a pass and a shot went up.  I blocked him out pretty hard because i was a little PO'd.  He had to limp off because i bruised him pretty good.  

That was my intention.  I was trying to send a message that i didn't appreciate the way he was playing.  Best way to handle it?  Probably not.  But this happens in sports.

Neither was bang-bang.  But emotions don't go away in milliseconds.  

[LeeEvans]

Just now, lancerman said:

Okay how about Bills players trying to take him out at the knees because they can't tackle him, with his injury history. How about he was held the entire play in front of a ref and it led to an INT. Literally every play with Gronk something a long those lines happened. Yeah it is understandable unless you've never got upset and did something stupid that you later regretted.

Honestly this is below you man. The Bills were not targeting him and not even Gronk said anything about that, all he said was about the lack of calls. If you're tackling a guy who is half a foot and a hundred pounds heavier than you you're gonna go low on them, its the only way you're going to bring him down.

[theJ]

5 minutes ago, LeeEvans said:

And I'm saying it isn't understandable. A couple of calls that went against him is not a reason to do what he did. It wasn't even a close game, the Pats were up 20 and halfway through the 4th quarter.

I think if i'm reading correctly, you're still equating right and understandable if your head.  They aren't the same thing here.  

I don't think it was right.  But i think i do understand what was going on in Gronk's head in this case.  

So, i can say i don't think it was right.  But in the same breath i can say i understand why Gronk did what he did.  Am i explaining this well, or no?  English is tricky.

[lancerman]

 

 

3 minutes ago, theJ said:

I think if i'm reading correctly, you're still equating right and understandable if your head.  They aren't the same thing here.  

I don't think it was right.  But i think i do understand what was going on in Gronk's head in this case.  

So, i can say i don't think it was right.  But in the same breath i can say i understand why Gronk did what he did.  Am i explaining this well, or no?  English is tricky.

In  a nutshell this is how I feel.

[TheVillain112]

Gronk is basically the Shaq of the NFL.  Just unstoppable and refs are letting people getting away with hacking/bumping him constantly.  It's not right, but his reaction was way over the line. I'm a big fan of Gronk and think like the AJ Green situation this is a one off isolated incident that's out of character for him.  Suspend him for a game, and hopefully he learns not to do anything close to that again...

[jrry32]

45 minutes ago, lancerman said:

No Pat player has laughed it off or said it wasn't dirty. They said at most Gronk's frustration for basically being held and targeted all game led to it and if the game was controlled better by the officials this likely doesnt matter. 

And I don't really need to hear about the outrage because I've been here (and you've been here) long enough to know that every fanbase has this happen when a player is accused of cheap hit. Hell most of the time it's fans saying it's okay. Gronk messed up, but the reason he did was very understanable. And unlike 99% of players in these situations, he didn't try to lie or make an excuse, he apologized. As did the coach. So yeah in this specific instance it's being blown significantly out of proportion.

What a joke. It's not understandable. Many other NFL players don't get the calls they deserve. They don't go around trying to attack the heads and necks of defenseless players after the play is obviously over.

We all know if any defensive player did something like this to Brady, gave him a concussion, and then responded "the Pats OL kept holding me," you'd be demanding the guy get a four game suspension.

27 minutes ago, theJ said:

Kick?  No.  For example - playing basketball once a guy was being a rough, hold jerseys, hand slapping, etc.  Refs called none of it.  I had a fast break, and got hacked from behind.  No foul.  So going the other way on the same play, he made a pass and a shot went up.  I blocked him out pretty hard because i was a little PO'd.  He had to limp off because i bruised him pretty good.  

That was my intention.  I was trying to send a message that i didn't appreciate the way he was playing.  Best way to handle it?  Probably not.  But this happens in sports.

Neither was bang-bang.  But emotions don't go away in milliseconds.  

This isn't even comparable dude. If you had smashed that dude's face into the ground after he fell down, we both know you never would have been allowed back on the court. What Gronk did was well over the line. It wasn't quite as egregious as the Haynesworth stomp, but it wasn't far off. Don't try to minimize what he did. You don't target a man's head and neck, especially when there's that much of a size difference.

[Kip Smithers]

8 hours ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Is it? I mean, Albert Haynesworth was suspended a game for malicious on-field actions. Haynesworth didn't have anything to his name prior to stomping on Andre Gurode's head.

It's been a while, but precedent is there.

There is recent precedent with Trevathan which was real reckless but not even close with regards to intent

[theJ]

1 minute ago, jrry32 said:

This isn't even comparable dude. If you had smashed that dude's face into the ground after he fell down, we both know you never would have been allowed back on the court. What Gronk did was well over the line. It wasn't quite as egregious as the Haynesworth stomp, but it wasn't far off. Don't try to minimize what he did. You don't target a man's head and neck, especially when there's that much of a size difference.

The main difference is that i'm 5'10" 150 lb.  If i were Gronk's size, i probably would have seriously injured him.  I blocked him out running about 1/2 to 3/4 speed.

Anyway, i'm not minimizing.  I'm only trying to suggest that i understand what was going through Gronk's head.  Doesn't make it right.  But i understand it.

[Kip Smithers]

46 minutes ago, theJ said:

He didn't say it gave him the right.  He said it's understandable why he did.

There's a big difference there.

It’s not understandable.

[jrry32]

34 minutes ago, theJ said:

I think if i'm reading correctly, you're still equating right and understandable if your head.  They aren't the same thing here.  

I don't think it was right.  But i think i do understand what was going on in Gronk's head in this case.  

So, i can say i don't think it was right.  But in the same breath i can say i understand why Gronk did what he did.  Am i explaining this well, or no?  English is tricky.

Right and understandable are often connected, even if not 100% connected. If some guy told you that he beat his wife because she spilled wine on his favorite shirt, you wouldn't say, "Oh, that's understandable because I get angry when that happens too."

[LD696]

2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Or are they bringing up the theory that there is no free will and that everyone's decisions have already been made, so we can't possibly blame Gronkowski for it because there's no such thing as free will?

This is more likely true than not, tbh.