"burfict" ending haha

[BradshawsHairdresser]

If he blows it again--and I predict he will--then he may be suspended for an entire season.

If I ran the Bengals organization, I'd cut his ar$$e right now.

[Captain Lemming]

Lot of misperceptions on this rule and your are incorrect on the Shazier hit.

Rewatch the video closely. Shazier's head is already down while Bernard is looking forward at Shazier. As he approaches Shazier Bernard lowers his head to meet Shazier's.

The rule:


It could very well be the refs decided that Bernard was equally culpable in the helmet to helmet contact and therefore did not throw the flag. This is the most reasonable explanation.

I am sorry but your contention is ridiculous.

You do know you are arguing the "his head head kept hitting my fist" defense logic here.

Bernard did not "initiate forcible contact". Heck he "initiated" no contact whatsoever.
Bernard did not "deliver a blow". He was not even moving forward when Shazier lead with his head at high velocity and concussed him
Benard did not "use the crown of his helmet" in any way.

Shazier...initiated contact with a forcible blow using the crown of his helmet. He was THE ONLY ONE who actually did ANYTHING listed as illegal in that rule.

AMAZINGLY you only saw the ONLY thing in that entire quote related to Bernard. He is a running back. Therefore he shares blame for the collision?

Cant you people see how biased your comments are?
Hey I am one of the ingest homers here but fact is fact.

[BradshawsHairdresser]

Link doesn't work for me.

[Captain Lemming]

Link doesn't work for me.

Trying to Inbed a video but it failed. Here is a link

[URL]https://vine.co/v/ihlaEilrIPV[/URL]

How anyone can see this and believe Bernard shares in that hit and in view of the rule that this is a not a penalty on us that was missed they just are being biased.

Benard pivots, stands there and Shazier slams into him leading with the top of his helmet.

And the "lowered his head" argument is blown out of the water. His head is upright and vertical the whole time. Upon his pivot his stance is slightly lower perhaps.

You know who lowered his head? Shazier did which is the only way THE TOP OF A HELMET can be used to deliver a blow which is illegal.

[Captain Lemming]

As I mentioned in another thread during the Seattle game Richard Sherman and a guy from the Vikings (not AP) had a helmet to helmet collision because the ball carrier lowered his head and Sherman lowered his head and they met helmet to helmet clear as day. No one, not the announcers, not the players, not the coaches, not the refs even made a peep about the hit. It was a normal play outside the tackle box by a ball carrier and a defensive back, they both lowered their heads and collided.

Shazier's looked worse because Bernard was trying to get moving but Shazier closed him down too fast and mollywhpped him. I think Steeler fans tend to agree that it was illegal because they don't want to sound calloused because of what happened to AB, so they will concede that Shazier's hit was illegal. Shazier has no past with being a head hunter, Bernard had actually caught the pass and a tackle was made. Rival fans are looking for anything to say, "see, you guys are as bad as Burfict" and not innocent in the whole affair.

The Bengals can't make chicken soup out of this chicken sh1t no matter how much they attempt to deflect blame from themselves and point at others to rationalize why they did what they did, which nearly every one of them has so far starting with Marvin Lewis (his "some penalties were called, others weren't" comment), to Pacman Jones and finally to Burfict.

Pappy

A point here about the motives. I don't think anyone thinks there is an equivalency between what Shazier did and the pure thuggery that is Bufect. Do I think Shazier wanted to injure anybody? No. Do I think he wanted to separate the runner from the ball? Absolutely.

And he did so successfully and I'm selfishly GLAD he was not called on it. But the fumble happened because Bernard was knocked out cold by an illegal helmet hit. Had Shazier wrapped up and made a legal tackle it is unlikely that a fumble occurs. After all "consciousness" is helpful when you are trying to hold on to a football.

Therefore, when we cry foul because we didn't get to score on a fumble CAUSED by a missed penalty which we got away with like WE got robbed? THAT is just ridiculous.

[Slapstick]

But, again, whether or not they missed the alleged penalty does not negate the fact that they should not have blown the whistle.

Two wrongs don't make a right...