Countertrey wrote:die cowboys die wrote:uhh, maybe i'm the only one who noticed this, but the seahawks guy moss went after was in fact wearing a helmet. that's not made out of NERF, it's not an old-school leather helmet, it's very very hard.
this brings me to 2 thoughts:
1) it is exTREMELY unlikely that moss threw an actual close-fisted "punch" at a guy's rock-solid helmet. even in a fit of aggression, your instincts probably tell you that you're far more likely to break your hand than to harm him in any way whatsoever.
2) even if moss DID actually think he could land such a Herculean blow that it would smash a hole right through the helmet and knock the guy out, and upon actually attempting this somehow managed to avoid breaking his hand-- even if he DID punch the guy in the helmet, it would be utterly comical and completely preposterous to even suggest that he ought to be suspended for it.
there was literally no possible way in which he could've harmed the other player. punching the guy in the ARM would have even been a more serious assault.
taking a swing at another player looks bad, though, for the league's "image"- i get that. that's why you fine the guy, MAYBE. but even then, we're not talking about moss going up to another player and just swinging at him. the other guy very clearly was the instigator and wouldn't let go of moss, despite obviously knowing the play was over (seeing as the ref was standing RIGHT THERE. there is a huge difference in the way "the public" would feel about that, and thus what the league might reasonably need to do to protect its image.
...and it entirely misses the point. This was not an action in a "bang-bang" play... it was a deliberate shot taken after the play in an act of aggression. That was not a "push". The db was holding... that should have been called. Regardless, it was a technical violation of a rule, not assault. The same may not be true of what Moss did.
frankly, i am stunned that this continues to require so much explanation. actually, the point was established quite clearly but i'll correct an error in your response: moss was
not responding to being "held" in the penalty sense, the "technical violation of a rule" sense (he had already done that multiple times throughout the game, telling the ref what was going on and asking him to watch what the DB was doing). in
this instance, he was retaliating to being held as in "physically restrained", in a sustained aggressive manner CLEARLY
after the play had been over. that is absolutely, in every sense of the word, just as much "assault" as moss swinging back at him.
your statements seem to reflect an interpretation that suggests "since the DB initiated his holding of moss DURING the play, it doesn't matter that he continued to restrain him and push him long after the play was over". that is obviously illogical, and simply incorrect. it is absolutely no different than if the whistle had blown to end the play and the DB then went up to moss and grabbed him and tried to violently shove him around. when the play is over, you have to let the guy go. to continue shoving him around is, inarguably, a violation of the rules and should be flagged for a personal foul.
the way you are depicting it is thus: the DB had committed "Illegal Contact" on moss, so he went up to him after the play and cold-cocked him. if that were even slightly accurate, i might agree that it was a serious offense that would deserve at least consideration of suspension. but the fact remains that that is obviously a gross misrepresentation of the incident, unless you dispute that the DB knew the play was over. seeing as that the ref is standing 5 feet away from them, that seems like an exceptionally weak possibility.
[/b]
