obiken wrote:It was one of the worst and biggest meltdowns I have ever seen River. It was an embarrassment to the team, city, and fans.
Yea, I didn't see the game live and am just now watching the replay. They were at it from the get go. It seemed that the Bengals were more interested in fighting Steelers than they were winning the game. The coaches and the refs lost control of the game. IMO the Bengals deserved to lose that game and I don't feel a damn bit sorry for Marvin Jones as he's had discipline problems before. IMO he should have been canned years ago. Next to Belichek, he's the longest tenured coach in the league and he hasn't so much as won a playoff game for them.
Hawktawk wrote:You mean Marvin Lewis right RD?
7 first round exits and no wins with a very solid roster should really be the end of him shouldn't it? Especially whiffing on a near certain win at home in cataclysmic fashion. He lost control of his players at an absolutely critical time in the game. Marty Schottenheimer got canned by San Diego for losing like that in the AFC Title game and he was a better coach by far than Lewis will ever be.
He is who he is, he's who we thought he was.
kalibane wrote:For what it's worth, Ike Taylor (former Steeler and friend of Antonio Brown) defended the Burfict hit.
kalibane wrote:Do I really want to go through this right now? LOL
Let me say this. If you can determine that Marvin Lewis has lost control of the team then it's legitimate grounds to fire him. That being said even if it's the correct call to fire him now that doesn't mean you were correct if you thought he should be fired in the past. Additionally, I don't think you can look at that one hit on Antonio Brown and say that just based on Burfict's actions it proves he's lost control anymore than you could say Mike Shannahan didn't have control of the Broncos because of how Bill Romanowski behaved.
The reality of the situation was the Steelers were just as out of control as the Bengals and if the Steelers had lost we'd be talking about Mike Tomlin, Mike Munchak and Joey Porter instead of Marvin Lewis. The Bengals, the Steelers and the refs all share some blame for this.
It started with the Shazier hit on Bernard. It should have been a penalty for helmet to helmet hit. Then you had a coach on the sideline grabbing an opposing player by the hair. Of course you have the Burfict shenanigans and then you have everyone's favorite, Joey Porter, being allowed on the field to hang around next to the Bengal players after Antonio Brown had been moved from the field which should have been a flag.
The whole thing was completely botched and in that light, unless you have deeper knowledge of that locker room you can't really say that Marvin Lewis losing a playoff game without his starting QB who was in the MVP race prior to being injured, is grounds for firing him.
Again I have to remind you this franchise was more poorly run than the Browns franchise is currently being run until Marvin Lewis was hired. So to sum up if I was in the know and Marvin has lost control of the locker room then I'd probably fire him. If he hasn't then no, because the job he's done here is the most underrated coaching job of the past 20 years. Plus who are they going to hire who's better.
NorthHawk wrote:I think they should be trying to take that play out of the realm of legality if they are concerned about player safety. Shazier hit the RB in the head with the crown of his helmet. It wasn't like they were in the tackle box and both collided, he could have delivered a big hit without using his head.
kalibane wrote:I don't think Shazier was trying to spear and I'm not calling "defenseless" but he did lead with the crown of his helmet so it's a penalty for head to head by the letter. Now I'm not a big letter of the rule guy BUT considering what happened in the last game between these teams (and remember this was the same ref heading the crew) and the fact that they already had a coach grabbing a Bengal by the hair, the refs should have been calling the game extra to tight. I think that no call was what really sent things spinning in the wrong direction.
I also initially thought Burfuct running off the field was a delay of game but a former player made a good point. Interception balls are kept by the player all the time so taking the ball really isn't a delay it's pretty common for a ref to have to get a new ball after an interception or touchdown.
Riv, I know you weren't "you" in the general sense. I was just drawing a distinction.
That's why refs get so much s***. They're inconsistent in their calls and then go down swinging swearing that they aren't.
Seahawks4Ever wrote:I thought that Burfict should have been flagged when he and a few other players took the ball he had intercepted and ran off the field and down the tunnel. Wasn't that considered delay of game?? Marvin Lewis probably should have pulled Burfict aside after he did that and at least try and calm him down. But, very quickly the Bungles fumbled the ball and the rest is history.
I don't see how Rothlisbooger can even play with damaged ligaments in his throwing shoulder from his separation. Will Wallace pass concussion protocol?? I doubt the Stealers can defeat the Broncos with out these two players.
But fire Marvin Lewis? That would be dumb.
kalibane wrote:if it can be spun in any way to make the refs correct that's the way pereira spins it. It has to be absolutely indefensible for him to say a ref screwed the pooch. I don't give a damn what that dude says. If a flag had been thrown he'd be defending the penalty. They are saying that Gio made a football move but all he did was turn and I can't count the number of times I've seen s flag thrown on that same play and turning wasn't enough for Periera to call it a football move it always comes down to launching and leading with the crown. I'm not a fan of the call but it's made all the time and given the history of these two teams and what had already happened in the game the call should have been made.
That's why refs get so much s***. They're inconsistent in their calls and then go down swinging swearing that they aren't.
Sorry man, you're grasping at straws here. First you claim "letter of the law" now you're claiming "it's called all the time"? It isn't, because it isn't a penalty. He didn't "launch himself" though he did use the top of his crown and made helmet contact ( which has already been explained as not a penalty) I'm certainly not claiming they shouldn't look at making it a penalty, just explaining why it wasn't, and was called correctly. Spearing involves intent to harm another player by targeting and using the helmet as a weapon. I certainly didn't s see either of those things. Both players were moving at full speed, and whether you want to agree with the call or not, based on the aforementioned "letter of the law" it was indeed a legal hit. A player is allowed helmet to helmet contact on a runner, Gio like it or not WAS a runner. It sucks for Gio and the Bengals, but that's football, sometimes things happen that result in injuries, losses or mistakes.
NorthHawk wrote:Isn't the rule helmet to helmet is permitted only within the tackle box on a run play?
We had a discussion about this when the rule was initially changed and I thought that was the case.
For some reason, I thought it was a pass to the RB.
HumanCockroach wrote:It hasn't been called because the way the rule is worded REQUIRES the player to "line up" an opposing player and use the helmet as a weapon. Since players seldom "line up" a player ( Shazier could be used as an example as there was no time to fulfill this portion of the requirements) it is seldom ( if ever) called. Because the players aren't breaking ANY rules when helmet to helmet contact occurs.
What the rule changes: A 15-yard penalty will be called if a runner or a tackler initiates forcible contact by delivering a blow with the top/crown of his helmet against an opponent when both players clearly are outside the tackle box (an area extending from tackle-to-tackle and from 3 yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team's end line). Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or a tackler against an opponent would not be deemed a foul.
HumanCockroach wrote:I looked RD I couldn't find a single instance of one being called ( yet another added rule to clog the rulebook) this is the "why" it wasn't ( nor shouldn't) have been called a penalty.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 guests