Browner's penalty negating McCourty TD

[IllegalContact]

What? Those are his words, not mine. He said THAT IS WHERE THEV FOUL IS


What do you think I just posted? That is the transcript.

no it isn't........he said nothing definitive.....he said it was close.....if he thought it a flag was justified, he would have said it........he said it was close......not a ringing endorsement

but that doesn't stop you from running with it as some kind of mandate

 

[IllegalContact]

Once again, describe an UNAVOIDABLE hit then.

don't have to.....just look up the difference between capable and incapable

 

[Ring 6]

which is irrelevant since it was clear he was capable of avoiding......which automatically disqualifies him from the neck are portion of the rule as it pertains to being defenseless......

So now you agree the hit was to the head or neck area?

 

[IllegalContact]

Even the guy who's job is to spin everything in favor of the officials, publicly....



Again, this is the biggest referee defender on the planet, and even he knows, without actually stating it. Clean hit. The back and forth still going on here is just meaningless babble.

word

 

[IllegalContact]

So now you agree the hit was to the head or neck area?

no....i twas shoulder to shoulder, but it doesn't matter because he WAS NOT DEFENSELESS

 

[Ring 6]

no it isn't........he said nothing definitive.....he said it was close.....if he thought it a flag was justified, he would have said it........he said it was close......not a ringing endorsement

but that doesn't stop you from running with it as some kind of mandate

I quoted his words. They disagree with every word you have written in this thread except that it was not helmet to helmet.
Why didn't he say that the receiver could have avoided the hit and that bobbling took away his defenseless status? Because it is WRONG.

 

[Ring 6]

no....i twas shoulder to shoulder, but it doesn't matter because he WAS NOT DEFENSELESS

So now video evidence lies?
You keep avoiding answering the question that proves you wrong them going back and saying it all over again in 2 pages.

Where did the NER in Browner contact Green? Were Browners shoulders higher than Greens? What is higher than the shoulder and lower that the chin?

What is an example of an unavoidable hit?

 

[Ring 6]

don't have to.....just look up the difference between capable and incapable

Therefore every receiver on every pass play is capable of avoiding every hit, correct?

 

[IllegalContact]

What is an example of an unavoidable hit?

not browners hit on green, that's for sure

 

[IllegalContact]

Therefore every receiver on every pass play is capable of avoiding every hit, correct?

who said that?

oh yeah......you

 

[IllegalContact]

I quoted his words. They disagree with every word you have written in this thread except that it was not helmet to helmet.
Why didn't he say that the receiver could have avoided the hit and that bobbling took away his defenseless status? Because it is WRONG.

not at all.......he said it was close......not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone literally, but given his position, if it was the right call even if wrong in meaning but the net result correct, he would have said as much....he did not say it

 

[Ring 6]

who said that?

oh yeah......you

You have failed to give a single example of what would constitute and unavoidable hit.

 

[Ring 6]

not at all.......he said it was close......not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone literally, but given his position, if it was the right call even if wrong in meaning but the net result correct, he would have said as much....he did not say it

Those were his words.
Other than what we agreed on, that it wasn't helmet to helmet, they concur with everything I have said and disagree or don't bring up everything you said.

If he wasn't defenseless, if it wasn't to the head and neck area if bobbling mattered, he would have said that too.

 

[Haley]

So now you agree the hit was to the head or neck area?

Blandino said that the hit was not to the neck, but rather the shoulder.

 

[Ring 6]

Blandino said that the hit was not to the neck, but rather the shoulder.

No he didnt

 

[james87654]

i wish i could chime in on such a glorious thread.....but i dont have a strong opinion on the matter

 

[Haley]

No he didnt

Suddenly I feel like I'm in a Monty Python sketch.

But yes, actually he did. He tried to imply that the face mask grazing may have been something but fell short of saying so since it was clearly not the point of impact.

Blandino said that the helmet-to-helmet call was incorrect. However, he said that there is a provision in the rules that bars forcible hits to a defenseless receiver in the head and neck area. He said that Browner could have been called for unnecessary roughness on the play because his shoulder made contact with Green's face mask before striking Green's shoulder.

 

[IllegalContact]

You have failed to give a single example of what would constitute and unavoidable hit.

 

[Ring 6]

Blandino said that the hit was not to the neck, but rather the shoulder.

His words:

"I think the first problem [was that ] we announced helmet-to-helmet and this is not a helmet-to-helmet hit. That's incorrect.

"When you watch the play, Browner actually does a good job trying to lead with the shoulder and get his head to the side. You can see his head is to the side and he does lead with the shoulder.

"The rule does protect the receiver who is trying to catch a pass; it does protect him from hits with the shoulder and the forearm to the head and neck area. When you watch this replay coming up, you can see there is some initial contact to the facemask ... That's really where the foul is.

"This is close. It's a forcible hit. Is the contact, is that force to the head, or is it to the body? It is a very close play. But it's not a helmet-to-helmet hit and I think that's what confused a lot of people."

He states contact is to the facemask. The uncertainty is where the 'force' is delivered, but the rule does not state that this has anything to do with the rule. In fact it states that it does not matter if the initial point of contact is elsewhere, that a hit to the head or neck area is still a foul.

 

[IllegalContact]

Suddenly I feel like I'm in a Monty Python sketch.

But yes, actually he did. He tried to imply that the face mask grazing may have been something but fell short of saying so since it was clearly not the point of impact.

c'mon, man......that's not fair......Andy lives in an alternative universe