Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 12:53 pm 
*Host of .NET Awards*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
Posts: 8901
Location: With a white girl
Navyhawkfan187 wrote:
Image


got it from this...


So awesome!

_________________
Legal Notice: Only a very small percentage of the things I do and say can be taken seriously. If ever.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:38 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:46 pm
Posts: 3067
Location: Florence, Italy
Jazzhawk wrote:
I don't think any fines have been announced yet, due to the holiday. I expect them to start coming out today. We shall see. As much as we think it wasn't a foul, I am pretty sure he'll get fined.


After ET getting fined, it would not surprise me if he was suspended for the playoffs. Amazing the ridiculous rules these days.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:50 pm 
* NET News Scoop *
* NET News Scoop *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:16 pm
Posts: 8923
falcongoggles wrote:
Jazzhawk wrote:
I don't think any fines have been announced yet, due to the holiday. I expect them to start coming out today. We shall see. As much as we think it wasn't a foul, I am pretty sure he'll get fined.


After ET getting fined, it would not surprise me if he was suspended for the playoffs. Amazing the ridiculous rules these days.

Naw...no valid reason for a suspension.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Jazzhawk on Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:30 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:08 pm
Posts: 1627
Sarlacc83 wrote:
Considering ET got 15K for touching Tannehill, I'm guessing this one's going to come down in the 20K+ range.

Vernon Davis is a man, I don't think they view that the same

_________________
|~=[==~||~==]=~|
||Tfs LnD ] [ HAWKS||
RIP BFS. He was kind of a douche, but he was our kind of a douche.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:57 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:06 pm
Posts: 201
Location: Portland Oregon
Sarlacc83 wrote:
Considering ET got 15K for touching Tannehill, I'm guessing this one's going to come down in the 20K+ range.


As unintentional as it was with Earl, it was contact to Tannehill's head and that rule is black and white.

I believe Kam's hit was legit, but there's enough wiggle room in the rule to allow the decision to be shaded by the current hyper sensitive 'safety' angle.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:06 pm 
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:40 am
Posts: 4367
Location: Southern CA
According to this article, Mike Pereira tweeted that it was a clean hit, but the flags were thrown basically because the role book says to call a penalty if in doubt.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sportsli ... ing-feels/

_________________
Help bring peace to the South LA / Puget Sound communities. Are you in?
http://www.abetterla.org | http://www.abetterseattle.com


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:26 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:08 pm
Posts: 1627
sc85sis wrote:
According to this article, Mike Pereira tweeted that it was a clean hit, but the flags were thrown basically because the role book says to call a penalty if in doubt.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sportsli ... ing-feels/

Perhaps calls like this should be challengeable if the rule book says to throw a flag when in doubt.
Not sure if worth it in the long run though considering the amount of time already wasted reviewing plays, but had we lost by 6 or less, I'd be thinking otherwise.

_________________
|~=[==~||~==]=~|
||Tfs LnD ] [ HAWKS||
RIP BFS. He was kind of a douche, but he was our kind of a douche.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:32 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 608
Looks like no fines as expected.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:09 pm 
* NET Nobody *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
Posts: 7601
No consistency in the rules or the fines...smh

"Carolina Panthers defensive end Greg Hardy was fined $25,000 for roughing the passer for hitting Oakland quarterback Carson Palmer in the back with his helmet. Palmer left the game after the hit and was later diagnosed with a bruised lung and cracked ribs."

25k for that kind of injury?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000118299/article/cam-newton-fined-by-nfl-for-second-time-this-week

_________________
RELEASE THE KRAKEN! (FREE BROWNER!)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Kam wasn't fined... Right?
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:20 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 187
tomahawk wrote:
Navyhawkfan187 wrote:
tomahawk wrote:
I don't think the issue is helmet to helmet as it is a hit on a "defenseless" receiver. I don't agree with it but he'll probably get fined based off of history and reputation. How a 6'4" 250# man is defenseless is beyond me.


The "defenseless receiver" still has to be a blow to the head.....you're allowed to hit a WR still but you just can't go high on them...I'd start aiming for dudes abdomen if I was Kamtrak....start knocking the vomit out of guys...drop a shoulder pad right into their stomach...



I don't think it has to be to the head.

"The relevant portion of the rule is:

“It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are: [. . .]
(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;
[. . .]
(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; and
(2) Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body.”


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... yer-rules/

They probably called it because he just caught the ball and had not come down all the way yet before Kam hit him. BS rule but there it is.



"Unnecessary contact" is the pivitol point here. Kam's hit was necessary in order to prevent a pass completion. It wasn't unnecessary at all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ] 

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]



 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.