| 0 |
Subject: re Haynesworth
Posted by: sarge33rd
- [257222410] Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:17
5 game suspension.....Sorry, but I for one hope Gurode elects to press criminal charges.
yahoo news |
| 1 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:25
|
I'm torn on this one. Haynesworth did a dispicable act, but has acted like a professional in his conduct since the incident. He cannot get off scot-free, but a 5 game suspension is pretty lengthy and warranted (would equate to a 50 game suspension in MLB in terms of % of games missed). I can't say that he deserves worse or criminal punishment, but if Gurode does elect to file charges I cant't blame him.
|
| 2 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:29
|
Wouldnt "blame" him either, but I for one am sick of seeing high-profile types get off so lightly for what you or I would go to jail for.
Lets say for a moment, we're at the company picnic and get a game of pickup football together. Then in the course of that game, I did that to you.
1) How fast would I be fired?
2) How fast would the cops get called?
3) How soon before I got my "one phone call"?
|
| 3 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:35
|
peer pressure won't allow haynesworth to file criminal charges.
|
| 4 | boikin
ID: 59831214
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:36
|
I think it depends on courts you are playing at, but in general you are right sarge.
|
| 5 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:39
|
True. But how fast would I be fired if I smacked a female employee in the tush and said nice job!
Comparing a sport to "office" jobs is hard to do, because sports are given the ability to police themselves (lay down fines, suspensions, etc.). I actually play in a fairly high profile amatuer soccer league, and assaults and physcial confrontations occur that aren't related to the run of play. The league polices itself as suspensions pretty much occur weekly, and not once that I know of has it elevated to involving the police or jail.
On a related note, I got cheapshotted at a company picnic five years ago and actually had to go the hospital to fix my dislocated ankle; the guy still works here (and I still dislike him) but nothing really came of it except my ankle sucks forever now.
|
| 6 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:45
|
From Rotoworld:
The agent for Cowboys G Andre Gurode announced Thursday his client won't pursue criminal charges against Titans DT Albert Haynesworth.
Haynesworth apologized to Gurode on Tuesday after stomping on his head during Sunday's game. Gurode's blurry vision is clearing, but he still has headaches. Oct. 5 - 4:13 pm et
|
| 7 | rockafellerskank
ID: 180352016
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 16:52
|
So, do you wish to prosecute NBA players who throw a punch and connects? Isn't that battery? Gonna be a good fantasy team at Rikers.
How about a pitcher who assaults a hitter by throwing a deadly object and hitting him in the ribs?
Hockey players? Last I checked getting punched in the face at my company picnic would land you in jail to use your analogy.
|
| 8 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 19:53
|
I see a difference between a violent body-check, and the facial stomping. If that same Hockey player, deliberately slid his skates along the face of a prone opponent and opened a wound requiring 30 stitches, would I want him jailed? Abso-fvcking-lutely.
|
| 9 | Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 20:15
|
Boobie Clark filed a lawsuit for a cheapshot he received in the 70s'. Was actually in my Torts textbook in school.
Not necessarily on point, but I never miss an opportunity to bring up the fact that there was an NFL RB named Boobie. My favortie football card as a kid.
|
| 10 | rockafellerskank
ID: 49136120
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 20:19
|
first of all, I agree with you about more severe punishment, but problem is :"I see" You really want to decide these things that cause criminal convictions with personal viewpoints? I saw that one as worth of prosecution, but not that other one!
FWIW, (i didnt bring up body check), "I don't see" a difference in a punch in the face (my example) and a kick in the head as they are both potentially dangerous and battery.
|
| 11 | sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Thu, Oct 05, 2006, 23:13
|
There is though, I believe, a difference between hitting someone in the face with your fist, and doing the same while wearing brass knuckles. Just as there is a difference between kicking someone ion the head and stomping on their head while wearing cleated shoes.
If the batter charged the mound and attacked the pitcher with the bat, that is a criminal offense I believe. Not so with the "brushback" pitch which hits the batter. The one is a recognized tactic of the game, the other is criminal assault/battery. As for the pitcher "deliberately" hitting the batter with the pitch...good luck trying to prove that one.
No, you didnt bring up bodycheck, I did. Its an accepted part of the game. I turned it around to make the hockey analogy directly comparable to what Haynesworth did on the football field. Out/after the play, he stomped on the head of a prone opposing player, while wearing cleats. Comparable to the hockey players slashing a prone skater with his skates, not comparable to the melees which take place between the two or three goals of a hocckey game.
So to respond to your question...Yes, if the action takes place out of or after the play, and the offense is plainly and clearly deliberate, and said offense is done with theintent of causing injury...then absolutely the offending player needs to face criminal/civil penalty IMO.
Does what Haynesworth did fit that outline? No question but that it does.
|
| 12 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 09:22
|
I don't know Sarge, it just seems like a slippery slope if we start thinking that the norm should be "file charges." I mean, what happens on incidences like Orpheus Roye tossing a ref or Delmon Young throwing a bat at an umpire? Under your scenario, charges should have been filed against both.
We can take it even further, when would late hits or personal fouls become criminal offenses? Didn't someone (illegally) annihilate Kerry Collins a couple years ago,which resulted in a concussion and stitches? Didn't McMahon get completely cheapshot in the 1980's where a player deliberately threw him into the ground after a play?
I respect your opinion, and if you file charges, that's your perogative and I don't think many would fault you for it, but there is no way your opinion should become the standard. If I am Gurode, what's in it for me if I press charges. Haynesworth gets a fine (I seriously doubt he or any average person would get jail time)? I just don't see anything positive happening for Gurode if he files charges.
Anyhow, only one person's opinion is right, and that's Gurode's. If he doesn't want to press charges, then he has made this decision. Whether or not we would do the same thing doesn't make him wrong.
|
| 13 | Perm Dude
ID: 8931518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 09:28
|
The threat of jail time (one result of charges being files) could act as a chilling action on such actions in the future. I don't think we need to think that these actions, which are clearly outside the actions of sports which can be violent, can always be best handled within the sport itself.
The fact that he felt bad afterword is certainly something. As is the fact that he's had a history of violent behavior, on and off the field.
|
| 14 | sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 09:30
|
Of course it wouldnt make him wrong. To that end, there really is no "right or wrong" here. IMHO though, I htink the game itself has an inherent interest in seriously curbing this kind of thing, and I dont frankly see where a 5 game suspension is going to do that.
Scenario: I'm a player on a team with 5 weeks to play in the season. I'm no "star" by any means, and oour team is in a playoff race which is rather tight. We're playing the leader in our division and they hold a 1 game lead over us with a much easier closing schedule than we face. I just tackled their recognized "stud" RB. As I getup, why not give him a little something that will take him out of the gae for 2 or 3 weeks? Would certainly help my team to win this week and make it a better bet that this other squad could drop a game or two in the close of the season? Since I'm just a back-up LB, it isnt going to hurt my team if I serve a 5 game suspension. Why wouldnt I then?
Conversely, if the league took the view that they have aninherent interest in preserving ther integrity of the game, then I think the league should have the option/ability to file charges. In that same scenario I cited above, if I know I'm likely to serve 90 days for assault/battery, and I'm likely to face a civil suit for a couple hundred thousadn...I'm likely to draw an entirely different conclusion re that cited scenario.
|
| 15 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 09:52
|
Scenario: I'm a player on a team with 5 weeks to play in the season. I'm no "star" by any means, and oour team is in a playoff race which is rather tight. We're playing the leader in our division and they hold a 1 game lead over us with a much easier closing schedule than we face. I just tackled their recognized "stud" RB. As I getup, why not give him a little something that will take him out of the gae for 2 or 3 weeks? Would certainly help my team to win this week and make it a better bet that this other squad could drop a game or two in the close of the season? Since I'm just a back-up LB, it isnt going to hurt my team if I serve a 5 game suspension. Why wouldnt I then?
That scenario has been available since the dawn of organized sports. If the goal is to knock someone out for a couple of games, you can do it a number of ways including, but not limited to, intentionally injuring them or baiting them into a fight that will get them suspended. But, you will never get rid of this scenario, no matter what precautions you put in place. If someone goes to jail over something that happens outside the run of play, then you make a cheap shot during the run of play (dive at knees, crackback block a la Warren Sapp, etc.).
And what's to stop someone? Many things: being blacklisted by your league, reputational hits in regards to your family and community, fines, and suspensions. Sure, to the fan, losing a backup LB for a 5 game suspension is no big deal and great if it knocks out a starting RB of competing team. But, what does it mean to the back up LB? A loss of $300,000+k, the possibility of being cut because you are a backup LB and are replacable, and the hurt you've caused your family and the RB's family. That's a pretty heavy price just to known someone's start player out for 2-3 games.
|
| 16 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 09:54
|
Pretty horrendous last sentence...should of read:
That's a pretty heavy price just to knock someone's star player out for 2-3 games.
|
| 17 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:14
|
to me, this was one of those cases were there probably should have been charges filed, because it was not "part of the game".
other things - players fighting, bean balls, cheap shots with a hockey stick, late hits on the QB - have all been accepted parts of their respective sports for about as long as those sports have existed.
stomping with your spikes on the unprotected head/face if a player laying on the ground has never been a part of football, period.
|
| 18 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:21
|
LOL, I have never heard someone saying that fighting, cheap shots with a hockey stick, and late hits were acceptable in sports until now. That makes no sense to me.
|
| 19 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:35
|
I dont think Tree meant they are "acceptable" as much as what he said...they are "accepted" as part of the game.
I go onto a golf course, I cant sue if I get hit by an errant shot because its an inherent risk I accepted when I walked onto the course. (At least, thats my understanding.) But if someone attacks me with a golf club...thats an entirely different matter, and much more closely aligned with what Haynesworth did.
Football is a violent game/sport. Nobody disputes that. But deliberate, non-play related violence, is an entirely different animal.
You mention "the possibility of being cut" re the backup LB scenario. PRECISELY! Haynesworth, should be out of a job, at the least. Send a very clear message to the players...do this kind of crap, and you can kiss your 300k+ job good-bye. Join the ranks of the blue-collar and get a real job for 40k, cause you're done here.
|
| 20 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:48
|
Wrong, what happens when you are fired from your job? You find a new one at a competing firm. Haynesworth gets fired from the Titans and signs off with a new "firm" like the Jets. Firing does nothing except hurt the Titans because he can easily still find "work," particularly when you have a union behind you.
If a get fired from the bank I work at, I don't get blacklisted by every bank out there. I work at another one. I am not forced out of my industry, and neither would Haynesworth. That is a ludicrous argument.
I dont think Tree meant they are "acceptable" as much as what he said...they are "accepted" as part of the game.
Explain the difference please. Your golf analogy doesn't work. Getting hit with a golf ball is not a "penalty," like a late hit or personal foul. There is no inherant risk for being an OL and jogging and getting cheapshot/crackbacked by Warren Sapp on an INT that you are nowhere (see Chad Clifton).
|
| 21 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:51
|
If the league terminated him, he couldnt go to another team. Like if the SEC pulls your Securities license, you cant go to another trading firm, or if the BAR disbars you, you cant go to another law firm., etc etc.
I believe, FWIW, that the league has an obligation here.
|
| 22 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:53
|
More on the golf analogy and why it doesn't work:
You said "Inherent Risk." Inherent risk in football is that you may get hurt legally during the run of play. Getting hurt on a cheap play, more specifically one that is penalized, is not inherent risk. A player does not go into a football game thinking if I get cheap shot, that's okay, it's accepted as part of the game. Blatantly wrong.
|
| 23 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:57
|
Are you seriously advocating that this play should blacklist Haynesworth??!?!?!
Others I would like to hear your opinion on:
(1) Orpheus Roye and the ref tossing incident
(2) Warren Sapp on the Chad Clifton hit
(3) Delmon Young and his bat flinging debacle
(4) Any player who gets into a fist fight in a game
And anyhow, Haynesworth could still go CFL, so, as much as you want him to work a blue collar job, he wouldn't.
|
| 24 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 10:59
|
I dont think Tree meant they are "acceptable" as much as what he said...they are "accepted" as part of the game.
Explain the difference please. Your golf analogy doesn't work. Getting hit with a golf ball is not a "penalty," like a late hit or personal foul. There is no inherant risk for being an OL and jogging and getting cheapshot/crackbacked by Warren Sapp on an INT that you are nowhere (see Chad Clifton).
the world isn't black and white. it's gray. eveywhere. including football.
some cheap shots - say, a crackback as you indicated - are part of football. not acceptable, mind you, but accepted, and often occurring during the course of the play, and, honestly, not even always intentional and deliberate.
what Haynesworth did was intentional and deliberate, and perpetuated long after the play had ended.
|
| 25 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:05
|
Long after the play = 2-3 seconds?
You're right, the world's not black and white, but you and Sarge seem to think there is a big difference between this and many other cheap plays that occur. I completely disagree. Blacklist Haynesworth for stepping on someone, and let some of the other stuff go as they are accepted??? Terrible.
Add this to the list:
(5) Marcus Vick's stomping on Dumervil's calf in 2005 bowl game.
|
| 26 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:07
|
And there is difference in this play, hence the 5 game suspension that has never occurred before. Isn't that enough if Gurode believes the same???
|
| 27 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:09
|
Add this:
(6) Ryan Reynolds of Ohio State jamming fist into Iowa QB's throat two years ago after the play
So, far we have blacklisted 6 players plus any of those who get into a fight outside the run of play. Let's find more!
|
| 28 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:21
|
I do enjoy the way you keep changing your verbiage to minimize Haynesworths actions..
He didnt "step on " someone. He first kicked a prone opposing player, and then took a step, looked down at that player, and stomped his cleated foot upon the helemetless head of that opposing player. Dont downplay it, by saying he "stepped" on someone.
|
| 29 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:26
|
HE STEPPED ON GURODE'S FACE. I am not downplaying it. He got the lengthiest suspension in NFL history for a cheap shot. Good, I agree!!! It's equalivalent to 50 MLB games, which is what Delmon Young got 6 months ago and the best comparable I can find. Again, good suspension!!! Gurode has elected to not file charges, and yet you think the NFL should. Who is the victim? Nothing is being downplayed. Who cares about my "verbage" when everyone saw the play? If the NFL decides to do more than what Gurode would do, then bad move!!!
Good for you, go after my verbage. All it means is that you won't address the bigger points I have presented.
|
| 30 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 11:34
|
Add another one:
(7) George Teague tackling TO after the play during a TD celebration. Blacklist him!
|
| 31 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 12:10
|
HE STEPPED ON GURODE'S FACE.
no, he didn't. he kicked Gurode in the head, and then he STOMPED on his unprotected face, WITH HIS CLEATS.
the scenarios involving Young and Vick are certainly related to this, and i think criminal investigations wouldn't have been out of line.
i don't know about the situations involving Reynolds and Roye, so i can't speak on them.
The Sapp case was a hit during a play. definitely something he should have been punished for, but not criminal. the same thing with Teague, although as a Cowboy fan, T.O. got what he deserved with that hit.
as far as players fighting, that's a ludicrious example. that falls under the "accepted, but not acceptable" description from an earlier post.
|
| 32 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 13:32
|
the scenarios involving Young and Vick are certainly related to this, and i think criminal investigations wouldn't have been out of line.
I agree with that statement, and I don't think it would of been out of line for Gurode to prosecute Haynesworth (I never said it would be out of line). But the decision was made ot not prosecute Haynesworth, so, I don't see why this isn't a good decision, especially considering Vick and Young recieved nothing more (and actually less) than Haynesworth.
As for fighting, here are Sarge's Guidelines (post 14):
if the action takes place out of or after the play, and the offense is plainly and clearly deliberate, and said offense is done with the intent of causing injury...then absolutely the offending player needs to face criminal/civil penalty IMO
Fighting certainly fits these rules Sarge has laid out.
|
| 33 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 13:40
|
Oh, and the Sapp case fits Sarge's definition also of "out or after the play." It was certainly out of the play and would deserve blacklisting. Your rules may be different than Sarge's, but all of my examples fit Sarge's description of what would constitute being kicked out.
Orpheus Roye was the infamous flag to the eye play. You must remember it!
Ryan Reynolds play was terrible, and as an OSU fan, I hated to see him to do it. He tackled the QB after a run (on a last minute drive to win the game), he put his fist in the QB's neck, and pushed down. No foul was called (hard to see from the ref's vantage point) and the QB couldn't even call plays the rest of the way (no voice). One of the dirtier plays I've seen...OSU suspended him for 1 game.
And why did TO deserve it? For celebrating? I certainly don't fault Teague for doing what he did, but it did have "intent to injure," and, again, it fits all of Sarge's requirements.
|
| 34 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 13:41
|
(8) Zidane's head butt...Throw him in jail!
|
| 35 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 16:32
|
But the decision was made ot not prosecute Haynesworth, so, I don't see why this isn't a good decision, especially considering Vick and Young recieved nothing more (and actually less) than Haynesworth.
that's a piss poor argument. so, we shouldn't prosecute a criminal because we didn't prosecute in a previous case. that's a really, really, lame argument.
Orpheus Roye was the infamous flag to the eye play. You must remember it
Orlando Brown, you mean? yea, i'd say he was sufficiently punished. between his indefinite suspension and the eye injury, dude missed about 4 years.
|
| 36 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 16:57
|
Lame if you believe that is my argument. The argument is not" don't do it because we didn't do it before." The argument is, no one really complained about what punishment Vick and Young rec'd, so, why is it a big deal now? Again, I have said MULTIPLE TIMES, if Gurode decided to prosecute, I wouldn't blame him. Since he didn't why is this not sufficient? Why does the NFL need to do more than what Gurode is willing to do?
Yes, Orlando Brown, what a faux pas on my part. He missed 4 years, but under Sarge's scenarios, he should have full ban.
I actually think you and I are closer in agreement, you are just choosing to ignore my points and you seem to think I am defending Haynesworth.
My opinion is:
- Suspension is warranted for Haynesworth. It occured. I am fine with a 5 game suspension because is sets a good precedent. You do something so blantatly wrong, you miss 33% of the season and 33% of your salary.
- If charges are filed, that's Gurode's call. He has elected to not file charges, so, that aspect of the discussion should be dropped. Charges were not filed by Gurode, the NFL should also not file charges. The NFL tends to agree with me.
- You can't blacklist or "fire" Haynesworth for what he did. Hardly anyone gets blacklisted, and heck, it even takes 3 substance abuse violations to miss 4 games. And people want Haynesworth out for this single violation. Come on, be realistic.
- If we want to blacklist or "fire" Haynesworth then every year we would probably have to blacklist someone else for some non-run of play offense. It's stupid.
-Overall, I think the whole situtation has been handled well. I am fine with everything Gurode and the NFL have done/not done to Haynesworth.
|
| 37 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 16:59
|
prosecute a criminal
That makes me laugh; and you guys want to attack my verbage...
|
| 38 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 17:52
|
it's called an analogy...
|
| 39 | leggestand
ID: 5935218
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 18:30
|
Thanks.
|
| 40 | sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Fri, Oct 06, 2006, 23:47
|
The Teague-TO scenario, doesnt even begin or come anything close, to matching the Haynesworth action. I dont see, where one could prove "intent to commit bodily harm" on what Teague did. What he did, is no different from what gets done to virtually every ball carrier on virtually every play in the NFL.
The other plays you refer to, I dont recall ever seeing, so really cannot address. I agree that it is Gurodes call. I disagree, in that i think the league should have taken a far more punitive stance. The salary portion in this particular, to these guys is pretty meaningless. It would be like fining George Soros (SP?), $250,000. Hell, thats walking around money for him. I do something even remotely similar, and I;m in the clink for 90 days. So I'd accept that punishment as just...I'd even go so far as to say 30 days of missed work. Since he works, 1 day a week (Sundays for the most part...the other days are practice and dont count)...that means 30 games. Oh, thats like damn near 2 years huh? Well then, maybe next time, he wont stomp on another players face.
|
| 41 | leggestand
ID: 5935218
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 10:55
|
Since he works, 1 day a week (Sundays for the most part...the other days are practice and dont count)...
That actually made me laugh out loud. If any football player decides to not "work" except on Sundays, he'll find himself quickly out of a job. EVERY athelete knows that the "games" are the fun part, and the other 300+ days of the year are the real work and the reason why you are getting paid.
And I also have to laugh at the Soros comparison. Haynesworth had a 2005 base salary of $600,000 and you compare him to a guy with a $7 billion net worth.
To sum up your post:
1. Football players work only one day week, or 16 days a year. Pure BS.
2. Getting fined a couple $100k, or 33% of their salary, is pocket change for them ("walking around money"). Again, pure BS.
You really have gone off the deep end on this topic.
|
| 42 | Tree
ID: 3991079
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 11:18
|
Getting fined a couple $100k, or 33% of their salary, is pocket change for them ("walking around money"). Again, pure BS
Haynesworth will make 5.5 million dollars next season. a couple 100K ain't gonna gonna kill him.
|
| 43 | leggestand
ID: 5935218
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 11:36
|
Again, LOL, I love how easily you guys can make your rationale for taking his money is because he has alot or "enough." Sheesh, jealous much?
Interesting news is coming out still:
Titans to Release Haynesworth?
It looks like the Titans may let him go, WHICH AGAIN I AM FINE WITH. He will get picked up somewhere else (probably not in Dallas), which again I am also fine with.
I still contend that everything that has happened and continues to happen so far regarding the situtation is acceptable. Yet, you guys appear to want to ruin Haynesworth's life as much as possible. Blacklist him, take all his money, throw him in jail for not thinking for 3 seconds in his life. Yet, if you do drugs, drive drunk, run a pedestrian cop off the road, you only get a slap on the wrist, unless you do it 3 times, then you'll get suspended 4 games, still less than Haynesworth.
|
| 44 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 11:41
|
You totally fail to see the point I am trying to make. IF the league makes this kind of conduct, fatal to ones career, THEN the actors of the future most likely wont engage in such conduct. It means making an example out of Haynesworth yes...but didnt he pretty much volunteer for that role by his own decision/action?
|
| 45 | leggestand
ID: 5935218
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 11:49
|
Do you seriously think people are out there saying, "it's no big deal, Haynesworth only got a five game suspension and 33% of lost salary? I can do that whenever I want then." Everyone knows what Haynesworth did was wrong, so, how would this change that feeling?
I can almost guarantee you that if Haynesworth does something dispicable again, he will get a 10 game or full year suspension. And if he does it a third time, he's out. That's how all sports work; almost a 3 strikes and your out policy. And yet you want Haynesworth out on his first strike. Be realistic.
|
| 46 | leggestand
ID: 5935218
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 11:51
|
fatal to ones career
And yet Gurode is playing this weekend...
And don't give me "could of's" because I'll throw TO vs Teague right back at ya.
|
| 47 | Tree
ID: 3991079
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 12:11
|
throw him in jail for not thinking for 3 seconds in his life.
1. Haynesworth has a history of this behaviour. it's not "3 seconds in his life".
2. even if it was, that's no excuse. "well, yes, your honor, i did shoot her in the face with a .357, but it was less than 3 seconds of my life."
that doesn't cut it.
|
| 48 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 13:53
|
And don't give me "could of's" because I'll throw TO vs Teague right back at ya.
so what if you do? I already said that particular incident, involved nothing more than what transpires on a good nr of plays anyway.
|
| 49 | sarge33rd
ID: 257222410
Sat, Oct 07, 2006, 14:10
|
NASHVILLE, TN -- Defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, suspended five games by the NFL for stomping on the head and kicking the face of Cowboys center Andre Gurode last Sunday, issued a statement this morning saying he "just wanted to make absolutely sure [Gurode] was dead for good."
"The Titans pay me to do one thing out there -- kill anyone who gets in my way," said Haynesworth, who is serving the longest suspension for on-field actions in league history for his attempted murder. "Doing a thorough job is just good fundamentals ... On your first day of high-school ball, they tell you football's no more than blocking, tackling, and bodily assault with the intent to commit homicide."
League officials have suggested that Haynesworth's suspension also include anger-management therapy and a refresher course in the rules and principles of football.
OK, so thats from The Onion. ;)
|
| 50 | sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Sun, Oct 08, 2006, 20:04
|
Ti his eternal credit...Coach Fischer doesnt want him back either.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|