VIDEO: Terrell Suggs Should Be Fined - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

Patriot_in_NY · 10-05-2009, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

The helmet one was stupid - but I did think the fact he dove at his legs it deserved to be called. If he had gotten there just as the ball was released - then there's always the case that it's football and that they should let them play. But the ball was already gone, and he was just standing there watching it when Suggs dove at him - which as I wrote was probably the only reason why Brady was able to get out of the way.

Actually, I watched the "helmet call" a few times. The dude put hit mitt right in Brady's grill, so much so that Brady flinched as if the hand actually made contact with his face. That is gonna get called 100% of the time the ref's see it.

I have to agree with the ref's call on that. Had it just been a glancing blow to the side of the head, I'd be right there with you Ian, but this was in the area of the face and there has to be some protection there. I have mixed feelings about the Suggs play. Half of me say's that's football, but the other half is mortified watching a guy fly at TFB's legs like that.

Matw · 10-05-2009, 03:08 AM

Personally, I thought the play was suspect to say the least. From the angle I saw it looked like he dived right at that knee. I just hope other teams don't take their frustrations out on Tommy's surgically repaired limb anytime soon.

***KontradictioN*** · 10-05-2009, 04:44 AM

I don't really care if Suggs gets suspended or fined or not. What I would like to see, after watching that video, is someone taking a shot at his knees. That would be payback enough... especially if the shot is landed.

***MoLewisrocks*** · 10-05-2009, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

I don't really care if Suggs gets suspended or fined or not. What I would like to see, after watching that video, is someone taking a shot at his knees. That would be payback enough... especially if the shot is landed.

And that's the thing. Then you would hear some hypocritical revisionist whining like what Rodney was subjected to his entire career. I understand the frustration with the way the league is interpreting or refining the rules of engagement from a defenders pov. I think most fans do (unless we are from a finesse team and have reps on the comp committee...). But there is also not a player on earth who doesn't see things differently when it's his knees being attacked. And at the end of the day it makes sense in the case of Qb's to protect the generally most defenseless player on whose shoulders, knees and head for that matter, most defenders teams also rely for their ultimate success. The problems arise because we are also at a point where several rather large and/or mobile QB's eschew giving themselves up and refs are too inclined knowing that skillset exists to call those guys in the grasp. Can't have it both ways. See the same inclination and inconsistency with forward progress and second effort and then there is the whole contact/who's interfering with whom debate not to mention when is a hold a hold. And it sucks when the interpretation of the day goes against whatever your team was trying to achieve.

More people need to take a page out of BB's book and play to the rule as interpreted or emphasized or enforced and (Please be quiet - edited). Ray Ray should also get fined for his post game comments particularly in light of the fact he got away with one on the Brady slide. Problem is he's got a young HC who also has yet to learn that whining gets you less long term than any potential advantage you are persuing short term. And lack of discipline is contageous. And while the media relishes discord and debate and emotional outbursts, the league knows that which is why on some level they attempt close rank and discourage whining excuses via fining. If there was truly majority concensus the rules would change. Otherwise you play to the rules as they presently exist and are being WIDELY interpreted.

***NEGoldenAge*** · 10-05-2009, 05:51 AM

If Brady didn't have such a quick release, he would likely be out for another season. Suggs did that on purpose, and should be punished for it. If that order came from the coach, we have a much bigger problem on our hands.

VJCPatriot · 10-05-2009, 06:31 AM

Suggs was going low and he was going for the knees. I don't know if it was intentional or if it was force of habit, but that's a penalty every time and twice on Sundays according to the rule. I think football players have to learn now that you've got to tackle QBs from the waist up. But this rule is relatively new, but it's not that hard to learn... you would think.

***buile*** · 10-05-2009, 06:55 AM

Obviously the penalty was called correctly according to the rules. The Pats had the Brady Rule called against them twice already (IIRC, once in pre-season, and the one on Wilfork).

However, I don't see any more/less "ill-intent" from Suggs compared to Wilfork -- they're both trying to make a play, and Suggs was pushed from behind. For Suggs to not hit Brady, he'd have to give up at the moment he breaks through the line... not going to happen.

I'm convinced NE will lose an important game because of a drive kept alive by a similar call against us... it'll be that or a "head-to-head" call when a Pats DB makes a perfectly timed hit on a WR. From the last couple times I've seen it called, I think the H-to-H calls threaten to get out of hand.

***MassPats38*** · 10-05-2009, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buile

However, I don't see any more/less "ill-intent" from Suggs compared to Wilfork -- they're both trying to make a play, and Suggs was pushed from behind. For Suggs to not hit Brady, he'd have to give up at the moment he breaks through the line... not going to happen.

Wilfork was going for the body and the QB stepped back, causing the hit to go lower than it would have been had the QB stood still. Brady was stationary.

I tend to think Suggs was not trying to hurt Brady but rather was trying to rattle him by the contact. As Suggs showed with Light in sacking Brady, he is fast enough that he could probably have turned in and thrown his full weight into Brady's knees. Regardless, I expect he will be fined for that move and should be. Nothing suggests he started high and inadvertently went low.

**Ian** · 10-05-2009, 12:18 PM

The headshot was from the guy swatting at his arm and unfortunately he hit him in the head. I don't think that was intentional - but according to the rules obviously you can't do that. You can't strike a QB in the head and they can't leave that rule open to interpretation based on the severity of the hit. That obviously makes sense, as you can't have a referee being put in the position to make that type of judgement call.

On the Suggs play, my issue is the fact that the ball was long gone and he was more or less standing there when he happened to look down and notice Suggs was diving at him. Suggs had more than enough time to realize that was a bad idea.

In case anyone hasn't seen this in a while, here is the photo of Pollards Hit:

Photo of the Brady Knee Injury : Ian's New England Patriots Blog

He got there as the ball was being thrown and was blocked into him. Yesterday was different, as Brady was just standing there watching the rest of the play when Suggs took a shot at him. Believe me, I'm all for guys just being able to play and I'm not one to call a play dirty - but either Suggs is a complete and total idiot - or he thought he could get away with one. Judging by the replay they're pretty fortunate since if Brady doesn't jump out of the way, we could be having quite a different discussion today.

in 12 we trust · 10-05-2009, 12:32 PM

just a classes move to take a shot like that.......just like "Sanchise" diving at a players legs in the NYJ/NO game.....