Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 199
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    735
    IT looks to me like Welker makes the hit at the exact time the ball hits the receivers hands. IT is close . And I was actaally laughing ( and swearing ) when Bellycheat was almost in tears at the press conference.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,169
    I am not disagreeing that there was no intent to injure, in fact I think that Welker was so surprised that Talib was right there already, that he just stopped. When Welker talked about the play, it sounded like a matter of him trying to play chicken with Talib, he said he was trying to force Talib to go over the route but Talib didn't budge, so it was one of those situations where you intend to go one way, but then the person you are mirroring goes the same way and BLAM, you run into each other. Welker is a smart enough route-runner that if he was aware of how close Talib was, and he knows his main intent is to just slow up Talib, he would slide down and to bring a basketball term set a "slip-screen", in other words, not make contact, and thus not risk getting called for the OPI. It was a bummer that Talib got hurt, of course the interesting thing is that there is no structural damage or anything to Talib's knee, in other words, it wasn't like Bowman or Harris. It really makes you wonder if Talib is made out of glass.
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...rib-and-return
    He was supposedly just "banged up", not passing judgement, but think about the grief Cutler got for sitting out the Chicago game.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,881
    He's just mad because he saw that Wes is still playing at high level. Belicheat knows he made a mistake and is trying to get Wes Welker fined. Because if he wants Wes fined, then his own guy should get fined for hurting DRC as well. And maybe the NFL should also take away their Super Bowl wins while they are at it.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    744
    During the game in Foxboro....the Pats defenders repeatedly knocked Welker down away from the play with dirty hits and not one word from Belichek about that ? What goes around comes around..

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New England, of course
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by dbjeff View Post
    Don't be confused by fans and other "experts" who think that picks are illegal. Picks are not necessarily illegal. The execution of the pick can be illegal if done improperly (or properly, I guess, if the intention is to do something illegal). If you want to know what's legal or not, just look at the rules for pass interference.

    Various retired NFL officials apparently have had differing opinions on whether this was pass interference. I tend to agree with those who think it's not since the contact didn't occur until the ball was nearly to Demaryius Thomas. Talib wasn't in any position to make a play when the contact occurred. Now, let's say the ball hadn't been thrown yet and Welker took out Talib. That would, without question, be offensive pass interference (an illegal pick).

    As for the hit itself, I lost a lot of respect of Belichick after his crying about it being dirty. You tell me which looks more like an attempt to injure:



    good God.....why don't you read FIRST and then opine, because you have it BACKWARDS and CLEARLY are not familiar with the Rule in question if you say
    "I tend to agree with those who think it's not since the contact didn't occur until the ball was nearly to Demaryius Thomas

    It's NOT a question of how close (nearly) the ball is to the receiver....it is ILLEGAL to block a player WHILE THE BALL IS IN THE AIR!

    You couldn't be further from the truth, and should probably be one of the last persons to sarcastically refer to the "experts", which you certainly are not.

    Here's all the pertinent Rules and Sections that you need to realize that was obviously an illegal hit. I've highlighted the most important section so you don't get lost or side tracked.

    Rule 8 Forward Pass, Backward Pass, Fumble

    RULE 8, SECTION 1, ARTICLE 5


    ELIGIBLE RECEIVERS
    Article 5 Eligible Receivers. The following players are eligible to catch a forward pass that is thrown from behind the line of
    scrimmage.
    (a) Defensive players.
    (b) Offensive players who are on either end of the line, provided they either have the numbers of eligible players (1-49
    and 80-89) or have legally reported to play a position on the end of the line. See 5-1-2.
    (c) Offensive players who are legally at least one yard behind the line at the snap, provided they either have the numbers
    of eligible players (1-49 and 80-89) or have legally reported to play a position in the backfield.
    (d) All other offensive players after the ball has been touched by any defensive player or any eligible offensive player.




    Section 5 Pass Interference



    Article 2 Prohibited Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air. Acts that are pass interference include, but are not
    limited to:
    (a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch.




    Article 4 Other Prohibited Acts By the Offense. Blocking more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage by an
    offensive player prior to a pass being thrown is offensive pass interference.
    Note: It is also pass interference by the offense to block a defender beyond the line while the pass is in the air, if the block
    occurs in the vicinity of the player to whom the pass is thrown.



    Please also Note....Article 2 includes the defender, since the defender is, BY RULE, also "An Eligible receiver"

    And BTW.....for all the Denver fans who are claiming that BB accused Welker of attempting to injure Talib, I suggest you look into what he actually said on the matter, because NOWHERE did he say THAT! In fact, he only said "trying to take him out" and was probably referring to taking him out of the PLAY...NOT the GAME! Where do you people get your silly ideas?

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New England, of course
    Posts
    656
    Oh...one other thing, since one Denver fan after another has mouthed off, claiming, then ERRONEOUSLY repeating, that the Edelman hit "was the exact same thing" as the Welker hit!

    Look at the pictures above and you can CLEARLY SEE that Collie is in possession of the ball and has thereby become a RUNNER, making Edelman's contact PERFECTLY LEGAL. The two plays in question COULD NOT BE MORE DIFFERENT......but nice try!

    I've lost a lot respect for many of you.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bojangles View Post
    And BTW.....for all the Denver fans who are claiming that BB accused Welker of attempting to injure Talib, I suggest you look into what he actually said on the matter, because NOWHERE did he say THAT! In fact, he only said "trying to take him out" and was probably referring to taking him out of the PLAY...NOT the GAME! Where do you people get your silly ideas?
    Really? Your are certainly naive if you believe that BB was not inferring that Welker was basically head hunting. The Donkey couldnt even reffer to Welker by name. How often does a coach or palyer for that matter not reffer to the player in question by name?

    Only when they are accusing them of something thats serious...

    EDIT: One more thing..if it was just a block to take him out of the play...why was it the FIRST thing he mentioned in the presser? Someone may have asked him..but it was hard to hear...seems he was making a point dont you think?
    Last edited by sstoner; 01-22-2014 at 10:09 AM.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New England, of course
    Posts
    656
    And before anyone starts whining about that photo of the Welker play....Talib is already half way to the ground, so please don't try to sell the "simultaneous" story!

    I can post another photo that is circulating out there, showing the ball 8 feet away from Thomas as Welker starts his block.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New England, of course
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by sstoner View Post
    Really? Your are certainly naive if you believe that BB was not inferring that Welker was basically head hunting. The Donkey couldnt even reffer to Welker by name. How often does a coach or palyer for that matter not reffer to the player in question by name?

    Only when they are accusing them of something thats serious...

    EDIT: One more thing..if it was just a block to take him out of the play...why was it the FIRST thing he mentioned in the presser? Someone may have asked him..but it was hard to hear...seems he was making a point dont you think?
    You don't know any more than I do about what he was implying.....the difference is you're not as rational, so jump to conclusions over what you see thru the orange-tinted specs.

    All we know for certain is what he DID SAY.....and it wasn't what is being implied around here.

    Hate on, on the Hoodie!
    Last edited by Mr Bojangles; 01-22-2014 at 10:20 AM.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New England, of course
    Posts
    656
    BTW.... I couldn't care less about that play...or any of them...since the game is over and Denver whooped NE regardless.

    But it's hard to sit back and read nonsense that is totally unsupported by the video or the Rules.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bojangles View Post
    You don't know any more than I do about what he was implying.....the difference is you're not as rational, so jump to conclusions over what you see thru the orange-tinted specs.

    All we know for certain is what he DID SAY.....and igt wasn't what is being implied around here.

    Hate on, on the Hoodie!
    I think if he was saying "take him out of the play" he would have said " take him out if the play"...


    not "he was trying to him out"....

    Because it its the former....there was was no need to say that!

    But since he said the latter.....ya... you have your PATS blinders on

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bojangles View Post
    BTW.... I couldn't care less about that play...or any of them...since the game is over and Denver whooped NE regardless.

    But it's hard to sit back and read nonsense that is totally unsupported by the video or the Rules.
    You should call BB comments as it is....whats in it for you to defend him?

    Nothing...

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    13,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bojangles View Post
    And BTW.....for all the Denver fans who are claiming that BB accused Welker of attempting to injure Talib, I suggest you look into what he actually said on the matter, because NOWHERE did he say THAT! In fact, he only said "trying to take him out" and was probably referring to taking him out of the PLAY...NOT the GAME! Where do you people get your silly ideas?
    That may be a stretch. The general understanding of "taking somebody out" is either A) going on a date or B) attempting to cause them serious injury or bodily harm.

    It's my personal belief that "that coach" was not implying Welker and Talib were going on a romantic get away after the game.

    Your insistence "that coach" meant was Welker was "trying to take him [Talib] out" of the "PLAY...NOT the GAME" does not match the rest of "that coach's" comments about having the league look into the play with potential fines. Heck, holding is taking somebody out of the play, but it is not a finable offense. To fine a player or a coach is for egregious penalties such as "taking somebody out" (not a date) and can be the only thing "that coach" meant.

    So please, stop trying to re-interpret what "that coach" obviously meant. He's no dummy, he says exactly what he means and doesn't need you or I to guess. That would be just silly.

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    992
    Quote Originally Posted by sstoner View Post
    The Donkey couldnt even reffer to Welker by name. How often does a coach or palyer for that matter not reffer to the player in question by name?

    Only when they are accusing them of something thats serious...
    Apparently this happens often in New England. Recall our illustrious coach refer to Cutler only as 'the player' ?

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    497
    BoJangles..

    maybe you need to read what he said again

    "I think it was a deliberate play by the receiver to take out Aqib," Belichick said during his morning press conference on Monday. "No attempt to get open. I'll let the league handle the discipline on that play, whatever they decide. It's one of the worst plays I've seen."
    If it was just to tak ehim out of the play why do we need the league to review for discipline?

    You take the cake sir...LOL


    Ya who has blinders on again?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •