Camp Fights

[Ad Hawk]

I'm still skeptical. I didn't hear what Danny said, so I don't know if he went into any details bout what was going on prior to the event. Seems unreasonable to me that Clark would randomly throw a punch even if sticking up for a teammate if it was just a shove, without additional provocation.

That kind of reaction usually comes after repeated offenses.

I don't like the result any more than any of you, but I'm not inclined to place all the blame on Clark or get on board with the Clark-lost-it bandwagon without a much greater understanding of the circumstances.

I will say I would rather have this sort of event happen than to have the entire OL stand there watching Hasselbeck take a cheap shot and doing nothing about it.

Edit: Oh and for the record, pretty much everything they do on the football field is at least a misdemeanor if you do it on the street, up to and including wearing lycra Capri pants.

Dude, you just crossed that line. :stirthepot: :rumble: :3-1:

LOL! :lol:

 

[sc85sis]

Rule #1: Protect the team

Even if it didn't cross the line elsewhere, it definitely crosses that one. He put himself and a teammate at risk for injury, helped continue the perception that the locker room has issues and disrupted practice.

 

[TwilightError]

All I'm surprised off is the fact that there was a fight and Michael Bennett was not involved.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

....The great players learn how to harness that energy and don't cross the line. The knuckleheads don't.

So Bennett would be a knucklehead for "beasting out" on the red headed QB?

He pushed Dalton down and sat on him, I'd hardly call that the same as flying into a scrum and sucker punching your own teammate in the face at practice risking injury to both of you.

Go back and listen to Pete after it happened at his presser, he couldn't have made it simpler to understand. There's a line, and Clark crossed it.

 

[Ad Hawk]

We all have our own "line".
It's part of what makes us individuals.

Let me explain with a graphic example.
In Texas, citizens have the right to use deadly force to protect their person AND their property/belongings.

I wouldn't shoot a dude for stealing my BBQ grill off of my deck.
I would shoot that same dude if I walked into my house and he was threatening or raping my wife or daughter.
That's an over simplified version of my "line".

I don't like the fact that these guys are missing practice because of a "fight", maybe because of discipline, maybe because of injuries.

Although I have no real right to judge, I'll reserve my judgment until I know why the "punch" happened.

We don't know why it happened, we don't know the line that was crossed.
It may have been nothing in some of our eyes, it may have been 100% justified in others.

The fact is....
.....we don't know.


Even if it was a "sucker punch", how can anyone decide if it was warranted if we don't know why it happened?

We all have our own "line", who's really to say if the line is in the right place?

I hate that it may have hurt "my" team but it may have been "worth it".

I just don't know, and may never know.


Edit: you might not be willing to shoot a dude for any reason.
That makes neither of right or wrong.
It simply makes us different from one another.

Thanks for the reminder that context matters, and we don't have all of it.

I feel the same way you do about protecting my home and "stuff" vs. protecting my family. I too would fight to save innocent life (CCP/CPL, YMMV); but stuff is just stuff, never worth a life. Context matters.

Now I'm not saying the team isn't important; it is and should be part of the reason to say Clark crossed a line. But #1 priority? Now way.

When the value of the "team" trumps the value of the individual person, it creates questionable ethics at many levels. Clark crossed a line, and it sounds like Ifedi did, too, even if he didn't throw a punch.

 

[Boycie]

The same as the teams. Fighting and intentionally risking injury to another player crosses it.

Great, but it doesn't explain why the line should be there.

Team value trumps personal human value, then. Yes?

It does. Risking injury is #1 obviously.

So, outside of the football field, the fight may have been acceptable since potential injuries wouldn't affect a team...

Would this be a logical extrapolation? Or do other rules then apply?

I'm really curious, then, why Clark wasn't formally charged. Are football players simply exempt since they're in abusiness where violent hitting is OK in certain parameters?

I would assume because the "victim" Ifedi didn't press charges, or maybe I'm wrong about the legal system?

 

[The Breh]

If Ifedi is getting chippy and risking his own teammates careers with knees, I'd hope somebody socked him up.
If unchecked, that dude may have done serious damage to a more established player.
I'll take a broken Ifedi face over a damaged Bennett, Avril or Clark knee anyday.

Some people need to get checked.
Y'all were way too quick to jump on Clark for this.

 

[Chukarhawk]

According the the 710 crew that witnessed it, Clark dropped him with one punch and it was described as Ifedi looked like he was hit by a "lighting bolt". When punches are described in those terms, to me, that means he was knocked out cold.

 

[bigskydoc]

Taking a cue from hockey, fights usually occur when one team is sending a message. Used to be, all teams had that guy who was sent onto the ice when a message needed to be sent. We had them as early as Pee Wee (12 year old) hockey. They didn't fight, but were tapped to send a message to the other team in a targeted manner. "See that kid? Go check him hard, and clean, into the boards or the ice."

If Ifedi was taking cheap, potentially career ending, shots at the defense, it may be that Clark felt a message needed to be sent, and it's entirely possible that he enjoys the support of his teammates for his actions. Clearly, they had "acceptable" scrums before the incident, but neither these, nor whatever the coaches were doing, were sufficient to stop Ifedi.

Not saying that his actions were, necessarily, acceptable. Just that they might be understandable, and forgivable. I would want to know more than I will ever get to know to make a judgement.

 

[chris98251]

Ifedi did this last year as well and got into a few scuffles, it may have been with Clark then also, Clark may have just had enough.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Taking a cue from hockey, fights usually occur when one team is sending a message. Used to be, all teams had that guy who was sent onto the ice when a message needed to be sent. We had them as early as Pee Wee (12 year old) hockey. They didn't fight, but were tapped to send a message to the other team in a targeted manner. "See that kid? Go check him hard, and clean, into the boards or the ice."

If Ifedi was taking cheap, potentially career ending, shots at the defense, it may be that Clark felt a message needed to be sent, and it's entirely possible that he enjoys the support of his teammates for his actions. Clearly, they had "acceptable" scrums before the incident, but neither these, nor whatever the coaches were doing, were sufficient to stop Ifedi.

Not saying that his actions were, necessarily, acceptable. Just that they might be understandable, and forgivable. I would want to know more than I will ever get to know to make a judgement.

Right.......sent out on the ice to send a message to the other team. Not sent out on the ice to fight with his own teammate.

Pete's been brilliant throughout his entire career to acquire players that bully, intimidate and break the will of his opponents between the lines and legally, as we've seen with our own Hawk defenses demoralizing opponents through just flat out being stronger, tougher and nastier.

So yes, "sending a message" is a part of sports, especially contact sports like football and hockey. Fighting with your own teammates missing valuable practice time and risking injury has no part in the equation. You can do all these things through what I explained above.

 

[hawkfan68]

My take is this....Clark isn't going around punching people at a whim. At least he hasn't been since he's been a Seahawk until this last incident. Ifedi on the other hand has been repeatedly getting under the skin of other players since he's joined the Seahawks. Ifedi is the repeat offender. That's why I place the blame more on Ifedi for being the instigator. With that said, what Clark did was wrong no question about it. Ifedi should focus on getting under skin of opponents rather his own teammates. Someone compared Ifedi to Breno. I don't recall Breno starting fights in practices with his teammates. So they are as different, in that respect, as can be.

 

[bigskydoc]

Right.......sent out on the ice to send a message to the other team. Not sent out on the ice to fight with his own teammate..

So yes, "sending a message" is a part of sports, especially contact sports like football and hockey. Fighting with your own teammates missing valuable practice time and risking injury has no part in the equation. You can do all these things through what I explained above.

Generally agree. If one of my kids sucker punched a team-mate, one of them would have kicked him off the team immediately. Almost certainly the puncher, but if I found out it was justified (punchee attempted to kick a team-mate while he was down etc), I would have kicked the punchee off in a NY minute.

Going out on a limb here, but I feel that if it was truly an unwarranted sucker punch, the punishment from Carroll would have been more severe. If Ifedi was taking cheap, low, career threatening shots at defenders (not an entirely unlikely scenario), and the coaches weren't doing something about it, then I would say Clark was justified in sending a message.

Seeing as the punishment wasn't more severe, I have to think there was an element of justification for Clark's actions.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Right.......sent out on the ice to send a message to the other team. Not sent out on the ice to fight with his own teammate..

So yes, "sending a message" is a part of sports, especially contact sports like football and hockey. Fighting with your own teammates missing valuable practice time and risking injury has no part in the equation. You can do all these things through what I explained above.

Generally agree. If one of my kids sucker punched a team-mate, one of them would have kicked him off the team immediately. Almost certainly the puncher, but if I found out it was justified (punchee attempted to kick a team-mate while he was down etc), I would have kicked the punchee off in a NY minute.

Going out on a limb here, but I feel that if it was truly an unwarranted sucker punch, the punishment from Carroll would have been more severe. If Ifedi was taking cheap, low, career threatening shots at defenders (not an entirely unlikely scenario), and the coaches weren't doing something about it, then I would say Clark was justified in sending a message.

Seeing as the punishment wasn't more severe, I have to think there was an element of justification for Clark's actions.

I disagree, I'm old school when it comes to a team, especially a sports team. You never act out and put yourself ahead of the team. That's what Clark did IMO, he selfishly lost his temper and put himself first not thinking about team.

Ifedi has been known to be chippy in practice, so I'm not saying he's totally innocent. But that's what coaches are for, to reign players in and discipline if needed. That's the healthiest way to deal with this sort of situation.

Doesn't mean Clark had to back down, or any of the other defensive players. But it does mean you NEVER risk injury or miss practice time that gives a possibility of hurting the whole. Which this did.

 

[Siouxhawk]

And according to today's practice tweets, Clark is limping noticeably. Great.

 

[hawk45]

And according to today's practice tweets, Clark is limping noticeably. Great.

:34853_doh:

They wouldn't have him practicing if it were the kind of thing that activity would worsen, would they? I sure hope not.

 

[chris98251]

So if your old school you remember the Angels that were Merlin Olson, Conrad Dobler, Otis Sistrunk, Alex Karras .

 

[LolaRox]

My take is this....Clark isn't going around punching people at a whim. At least he hasn't been since he's been a Seahawk until this last incident. Ifedi on the other hand has been repeatedly getting under the skin of other players since he's joined the Seahawks. Ifedi is the repeat offender. That's why I place the blame more on Ifedi for being the instigator. With that said, what Clark did was wrong no question about it. Ifedi should focus on getting under skin of opponents rather his own teammates. Someone compared Ifedi to Breno. I don't recall Breno starting fights in practices with his teammates. So they are as different, in that respect, as can be.

Yep.

Pete referenced Wally Pipp, in his presser yesterday, when talking about Ifedi and Pocic. Pete said Pocic got a chance, jumped at it and did very well. Based on that Ifedi better concentrate on winning a job or he'll be irritating people from the bench.

and yeah, he's no Breno.

 

[kidhawk]

I find it quite odd that so many fans are blaming Ifedi for getting under his skin, while not throwing a punch, coaches and teammates all seem to be in agreement that it was Clark who crossed the line.

I'm not saying that Ifedi is an innocent angel in all this, I just find it interesting how many fans are 180 degrees from the team's viewpoint.

 

[chris98251]

I find it quite odd that so many fans are blaming Ifedi for getting under his skin, while not throwing a punch, coaches and teammates all seem to be in agreement that it was Clark who crossed the line.

I'm not saying that Ifedi is an innocent angel in all this, I just find it interesting how many fans are 180 degrees from the team's viewpoint.

Crossed the line, more like thru a punch with his helmet off, it would not have been as much of an issue if the helmet was on. Ifedi is dirty on certain levels, Clark was caught in retaliation.

Should have just punched him in a pile up like they do in game situations.