Cribbs defends Harrison

[Steeler SChuck]

Josh Cribbs sticks up for ... James Harrison? | National Football Post

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/o...fends-harrison/

There it is.

[Neo]

We can disagree with even with our own players and I disagree. I want the best players out on the field from both teams. I am someone who doesn't like stuff handed to me. If and when we finally win the Superbowl, I want the BEST team with their BEST players out on the field so when we BEAT THAT ASS we can say we truely are the best. (edit) Trying to take out opposing players is straight CHICKEN SHIT. Period.

[Legacy Fan]

Yeah, because it isn't like Cribbs is the face of a franchise or anything. Nor is he somebody who thinks before he speaks.

[Steeler SChuck]

Originally Posted by Legacy Fan

Yeah, because it isn't like Cribbs is the face of a franchise or anything. Nor is he somebody who thinks before he speaks.

Just my objective opinion, and some stains outsiders would agree, but Cribbs is the face of the stains.

There's a lot of back-and-forth on this issue. The flow of the issue is ebbing and we're seeing football purists now challenge the NFL's hasty tactics. It's not just Steeler fans or the Rooneys, it's now the players stepping up and questioning these questionable moves.

Anyone who caught Jason Taylor's segment on ESPN will know what I'm talking about.

Or Steve Young - the poster boy of concussions who suggested that football as we know it is dead and should be referred to as "rugby with helmets".

If you saw that ESPN segment where they showed the Harrison hit, they broke it down to show that massafuckwhatever ducked at the last second which made the hit look worse than it should be.

Taylor stated that the game is played at full speed, decisions are made in a fraction of a second and you can't easily determine intent based on the outcome.

They then went on to show a hit from Ray Lewis on a player that was touted as "here's how you hit a guy" and pointed out that he left his feet and hit a basically undefended WR and should have been flagged/fined based on the NFL's interpretation of the rules.

No, this isn't an issue about Harrison - it's a bigger matter. One that isn't decided in a few days.

[Legacy Fan]

Originally Posted by Steeler SChuck

Just my objective opinion, and some stains outsiders would agree, but Cribbs is the face of the stains.

There's a lot of back-and-forth on this issue. The flow of the issue is ebbing and we're seeing football purists now challenge the NFL's hasty tactics. It's not just Steeler fans or the Rooneys, it's now the players stepping up and questioning these questionable moves.

Anyone who caught Jason Taylor's segment on ESPN will know what I'm talking about.

Or Steve Young - the poster boy of concussions who suggested that football as we know it is dead and should be referred to as "rugby with helmets".

If you saw that ESPN segment where they showed the Harrison hit, they broke it down to show that massafuckwhatever ducked at the last second which made the hit look worse than it should be.

Taylor stated that the game is played at full speed, decisions are made in a fraction of a second and you can't easily determine intent based on the outcome.

They then went on to show a hit from Ray Lewis on a player that was touted as "here's how you hit a guy" and pointed out that he left his feet and hit a basically undefended WR and should have been flagged/fined based on the NFL's interpretation of the rules.

No, this isn't an issue about Harrison - it's a bigger matter. One that isn't decided in a few days.

That was me being sarcastic. (I even typed slowly and included a visual aid)

Anyways. You're missing the entire boat about the reasoning for which the NFL has decided to 're-evaluate' their stance on some of the questionable hits.

It isn't about game speed. It isn't about what MoMass did at the last second that (now according to the Stooler fans) caused the violent hit & concussion.

James Roidface Harrison LEAD WITH THE CROWN OF HIS HEAD TO MAKE THE TACKLE. IT HAS NOT, NOR WILL EVER BE THE PROPER WAY TO TACKLE. IT'S NOT SAFE FOR EITHER PARTY, AND IS JUST POOR TECHNIQUE.

That is what the fuss is about. Not trying puss out the game or whatever talentless roidneck's are fearing.

I did see the segment. Go check Ray-Ray's tackle again. He lead with his shoulder, and made contact with the guy's chest. Totally different.

[Dan in Florida]

Directed to the Stool:
Who Cares!

[Steeler SChuck]

Originally Posted by Legacy Fan

That was me being sarcastic. (I even typed slowly and included a visual aid)

Anyways. You're missing the entire boat about the reasoning for which the NFL has decided to 're-evaluate' their stance on some of the questionable hits.

It isn't about game speed. It isn't about what MoMass did at the last second that (now according to the Stooler fans) caused the violent hit & concussion.

James Roidface Harrison LEAD WITH THE CROWN OF HIS HEAD TO MAKE THE TACKLE. IT HAS NOT, NOR WILL EVER BE THE PROPER WAY TO TACKLE. IT'S NOT SAFE FOR EITHER PARTY, AND IS JUST POOR TECHNIQUE.

That is what the fuss is about. Not trying puss out the game or whatever talentless roidneck's are fearing.

I did see the segment. Go check Ray-Ray's tackle again. He lead with his shoulder, and made contact with the guy's chest. Totally different.

According to the NFL rules, and I've read them, you can't lead with your arms, head, shoulder, dick - whatever if the WR is deemed defenseless.

The issue with massassassawhatever was that he, at the last second, after SEEING Harrison getting ready to T-up on him dropped, hence the awkward hit.

When you see a guy, are you defenseless at that point? That's the question.

Furthermore, if you drop at the last second causing an awkward hit, is that INTENT?

The argument is no, you can't react at that speed, at that split-second. Same for Cribbs, a defender goes to hit a guy and that guy reacts. What happens after that is what needs to be determined.

A couple of the other Sunday hits I'd fully agree with you. Intent is pretty obvious when the WR is clearly not aware of his surroundings. Massasuckoi knew Harrison was bearing down. Cribbs, a little of a different story, he was a RB.

[hiwaygal]

Josh's concussion must be worse than originally thought...

[Steeler SChuck]

Originally Posted by Dan in Florida

Directed to the Stool:
Who Cares!

Football fans do.

Join the club.

[Legacy Fan]

Originally Posted by Steeler SChuck

According to the NFL rules, and I've read them, you can't lead with your arms, head, shoulder, dick - whatever if the WR is deemed defenseless.

The issue with massassassawhatever was that he, at the last second, after SEEING Harrison getting ready to T-up on him dropped, hence the awkward hit.

When you see a guy, are you defenseless at that point? That's the question.

Furthermore, if you drop at the last second causing an awkward hit, is that INTENT?

The argument is no, you can't react at that speed, at that split-second. Same for Cribbs, a defender goes to hit a guy and that guy reacts. What happens after that is what needs to be determined.

A couple of the other Sunday hits I'd fully agree with you. Intent is pretty obvious when the WR is clearly not aware of his surroundings. Massasuckoi knew Harrison was bearing down. Cribbs, a little of a different story, he was a RB.

Now you're implying that MoMass can react @ last second to create an injury situation, yet Harrison can't prevent one in that same time-frame?

This is getting mystifying.


Johnny Cochrane, is that you?

[Steeler SChuck]

Originally Posted by Legacy Fan

Now you're implying that MoMass can react @ last second to create an injury situation, yet Harrison can't prevent one in that same time-frame?

This is getting mystifying.

Now you're getting it.

Ever play football?

If you have, even in the slow-mo version that schlocks like us have played you might appreciate that you can't react on a split second when someone equally reacts on that same split second.

When you start to insert your opinion of intent on close hits like this - and it's truly a close hit, then you start to venture into that gray matter area that becomes very subjective.

Flagging/fining a guy who spears a guy with his helmet from behind is a slam dunk. Others, it's a different perspective.

Fining Harrison $75k for that hit was a joke and purists are clearly making the case.

Look - I understand your bias, but regardless if you believe me or not - if the same thing happened to Hines Ward, I wouldn't be shitting the bed over the issue.

I don't post here much, but I'm an honest, objective guy. For what it's worth.

[Steeler SChuck]

I didn't address your point clearly, Legacy.

Answer this - who has the advantage on a rainy/snowy/wet day - the O-line or the D-line?