(01-27-2018, 07:26 PM)DragonFury Wrote:

(01-27-2018, 03:59 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: Oh for god's sake- shut up about it already. This is football and stuff happens unintentionally when you have guys hitting each other and the rules in place don't account for that at all. That doesn't mean a guy has to be fined for it. If the NFL feels compelled to do something about it then they can give him a warning. As it is they completely overlooked other players who intentionally led with their helmets which makes this even more asinine. 

I didn't like the hit either because I never like to see a guy get hurt, but to penalize Church and not others is straight up wrong.

Nowhere in the world does a person get judged based on what they intended to do. If I go 40 in a 35 zone I get a ticket for doing so, it doesn't matter if I intended to keep to the speed limit. I have no doubt Church wanted to hit Gronkowski cleanly and fairly and without giving him a concussion but he didn't and he was punished in the exact manner the NFL and the players union agreed upon in the CBA.

BTW, everybody always talks about the NFL not caring about concussions or player safety but the second one of their own players makes a play that directly endangers another player all of a sudden it's somehow preposterous to think said player might be held accountable for it. People in this thread are trying to have their cake and eat it too.

You’ve been one of my favorite posters for years DragonFury, goin back to your Calvin & Hobbes avatar days, but I gotta disagree with the “nowhere in the world are people judged by intent” statement.

 I understand what you mean contextually within the rules/parameters of a football game, but to attach such a blanket statement to it is off base.  

The differences between manslaughter/involuntary manslaughter, manslaughter/murder, 2nd degree murder/1st degree murder, reflect the fact that intent is, at least somewhere in the world, very definitively and seriously taken into account when judging harmful action.

---