Lol.  At least i know it is ok to try an rip off a players helmet if they tackle you late/commit a foul that isnt flagged.  Its only suspension worthy if that player retaliates.  

I forgot who asked but no, i would not "let" myles swing a helmet at me.  I also wouldnt try and rip another players helmet off that is a 300 lb jacked DL and then run after him after he then rips mine off.  Oh, and i have held a helmet and played the sport.  I'm just not having this "oh my god" reaction like most.  The helmet hit is definite grounds for suspension but a slap on the wrist for the QB and pouncey are a joke.  At least i know how the rules work better for pulling at helmets, swinging, and kicking.

The first rule of holes is to stop digging...

---

Fix the O-Line!

Lol.  At least i know it is ok to try an rip off a players helmet if they tackle you late/commit a foul that isnt flagged.  Its only suspension worthy if that player retaliates.  

I forgot who asked but no, i would not "let" myles swing a helmet at me.  I also wouldnt try and rip another players helmet off that is a 300 lb jacked DL and then run after him after he then rips mine off.  Oh, and i have held a helmet and played the sport.  I'm just not having this "oh my god" reaction like most.  The helmet hit is definite grounds for suspension but a slap on the wrist for the QB and pouncey are a joke.  At least i know how the rules work better for pulling at helmets, swinging, and kicking.

The first rule of holes is to stop digging...

Rudolph taught me that last night

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

Absolutely no one said that.

The league did by not suspending the player.  He might as well be wearing inappropriate field attire.

The league is fining him

---

The league did by not suspending the player.  He might as well be wearing inappropriate field attire.

The league is fining him

Thats my point.  I doubt it will be a massive fine, but once released they'll be others to compare it too.

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

The league is fining him

Thats my point.  I doubt it will be a massive fine, but once released they'll be others to compare it too.

They can't fine him too much, the guy is on a 3rd round rookie contract.

---

The first rule of holes is to stop digging...

Rudolph taught me that last night

you apparently learned nothing.

---

Fix the O-Line!

I don't agree with suspending Pouncey...

I think, in his mind, he was saving Rudolph's life. Helmets are heavy and can definitely fracture a skull swung by a professional athlete.

This is my take as well. Watching Pouncey lay into him was the only thing that felt right when i watched the whole scene play out. Only thing I would have liked to see was Decastro pull his helmet off so some of those kicks could have landed flush. That was sickening to watch. Then to watch him march off and see fans extend hands to like they wanted to high five the guy when going into the tunnels had me physically pissed. I am not some key board commando who thinks they could take on myles Garrett one on one but that pissed me off to watch.

---

If you watching real time Garrett gets to Rudolph literally as he's throwing the ball or within a split second.. you can see Garrett's helmet in Rudolph's chest... He may or may not have even known Rudolph had released that ball... In my mind it's impossible for him to have even stopped his momentum... As they go to the ground it looks like Garrett is laying on him for an extra amount of time... But really what's going on from the other angle is Rudolph is immediately trying to rip Garrett helmet off... As Garrett starts to get up and Rudolph kicks Garrett in the groin...at that point Garrett comes back and grabs Rudolph's helmet and tears it off...Garretts literally walking away at this point when Rudolph gets up like a little [mod edit] and goes to attack Garrett again.... At this point there's three Pittsburgh Steelers on Garrett.. This is when Garrett swings to helmet and hits him.... Rudolph then pulls the victim card by raising his hands as if he did nothing... And then gets pushed to the ground.... Where Garrett cross the line is when he swung the helmet... He shouldn't have done that... He definitely shouldn't have swung that helmet..... But to say that Rudolph didn't instigate this from the beginning is ridiculous.... Rudolph's a little punk... A primadonna that was pissed off cuz he got sacked several times and threw multiple interceptions... And then in his press conference took no responsibilities for any of his actions.... He's a little punk.... The only thing Garrett did wrong was hit him in the head with the helmet he should have just walked away.... But no doubt Rudolph deserves a suspension also

---

If you watching real time Garrett gets to Rudolph literally as he's throwing the ball or within a split second.. you can see Garrett's helmet in Rudolph's chest... He may or may not have even known Rudolph had released that ball... In my mind it's impossible for him to have even stopped his momentum... As they go to the ground it looks like Garrett is laying on him for an extra amount of time... But really what's going on from the other angle is Rudolph is immediately trying to rip Garrett helmet off... 

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

---

If you watching real time Garrett gets to Rudolph literally as he's throwing the ball or within a split second.. you can see Garrett's helmet in Rudolph's chest... He may or may not have even known Rudolph had released that ball... In my mind it's impossible for him to have even stopped his momentum... As they go to the ground it looks like Garrett is laying on him for an extra amount of time... But really what's going on from the other angle is Rudolph is immediately trying to rip Garrett helmet off... 

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

---

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

This is laughable. You are a “ he GroinkickeD so clearly started everything” person. I don’t care how much, what version, or what speed you watch this, I still don’t see this. He pushed him off while he was pulling him up by his [BLEEP] face mask. If he caught him in the groin it’s because his face was being tugged upward by the dip [BLEEP] and he couldn’t have seen(let alone intentionally kicked) his groin. 

Youll have better luck convincing people Garrett was just trying really hard to put his helmet back on when he clocked him a little bit LOL.

---

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

You were watching something different than I did...

---

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

It was a clean play, there wasn't a flag and it wasn't overly violent compared to everything else going on during every play. I hate to say it, but it seems like there's something else besides the actual play on the field motivating the attitude toward Garrett in this.

Rudolph started the illegal actions, then when he had a chance to get off the field after Garrett retaliated for his actions he instead choose to try to escalate. The worst part about the situation is Garrett's teammates didn't immediately come to his defense, Castro and Pouncey should have been the ones getting hit when they started going after Garrett.

I will say it could benefit the NFL to have a little more competitiveness and hate restored to this rivalry, so even though they're handing out suspensions and talking about discipline they're probably glad for the interest it'll bring.

Jagsordie's comment about kicking Garrett in the head, however, are disgusting.

---

The bolded is where I disagree. They never should have gone to the ground. 

The hit wasn't late.  But the takedown was blatantly late. 
 Garrett had plenty of time to disengage and had to know the ball was gone as Rudolph rotated, took steps, and half shed the tackle before Garrett doubled down and pulled Rudolph to the ground.  

It was flag worthy and constitutes instigation. 

Should Rudolph have tried to pull his helmet off?  Hell no. 
Was he justified in defending himself somehow against a blatant foul? Yes, but he went too far.
I was a little surprised Rudolph wasn't suspended, but I don't feel he "started it."  The late takedown started it IMO.

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

a. I said late takedown, not late hit 
b. I clearly stated in no uncertain terms MR was not justified at all in his retaliation
c. I don't see a kick to the groin - i see the QB trying to separate himself by any means available - still not a good look for MR though
d.  the whole "who started it" business is silly anyway.  Several players behaved terribly. Including Rudolph. You just happen to think the late takedown didn't "instigate." I think it did.  No big deal. 
e. Will people stop telling me to watch it again please? I posted a gif I made of it in this thread. I've seen it 20 times from two angles at multiple speeds, LOL

---

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

It was a clean play, there wasn't a flag and it wasn't overly violent compared to everything else going on during every play. I hate to say it, but it seems like there's something else besides the actual play on the field motivating the attitude toward Garrett in this.

Rudolph started the illegal actions, then when he had a chance to get off the field after Garrett retaliated for his actions he instead choose to try to escalate. The worst part about the situation is Garrett's teammates didn't immediately come to his defense, Castro and Pouncey should have been the ones getting hit when they started going after Garrett.

I will say it could benefit the NFL to have a little more competitiveness and hate restored to this rivalry, so even though they're handing out suspensions and talking about discipline they're probably glad for the interest it'll bring.

Jagsordie's comment about kicking Garrett in the head, however, are disgusting.

A blind man could see that it is more toward negative feelings about Garrett than the actual play.  Late hits happen all the time and this one was deserving of a flag at most.  Nothing extremely violent and nothing worthy of Rudolph trying to rip his helmet off because of it.  People trying to say a soft pull to the ground is so excessively violent to make it worthy of Rudolph yanking his helmet out of pain and frustration are just making excuses for him to be the victim.  Players get hit alot worse and "our" own QBs have even been as well.  Starting a fight was never in question and fans may have been pissed, but thats as far as it went.  I've seen OL come to the defense of QBs after hits but never the QB trying to fight the DL, especially when falling on top and not getting driven into the ground.  Rudolph escalated the issue when he could've just got up and let things be.  He clearly pulled Garretts helmet to the point where Garrett was on top of him but others are saying they don't see that.  It could be old age or just bias to support their own viewpoint.  As soon as Rudolph fell on top of him he started yanking at the helmet until Garrett rolled over on top of him and then when Garrett started doing the same then the kick to the groin came.  Some will say Rudolph was trying to get him off of him which is true.  What they wont admit is that he pulled Garrett on top of him by yanking at his helmet first and then when he lost that battle, he ran after him for more.  Bias is the only thing that makes sense and just shows why you cant believe what people say. Clearly, you always have to watch it for yourself.

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

It was a clean play, there wasn't a flag and it wasn't overly violent compared to everything else going on during every play. I hate to say it, but it seems like there's something else besides the actual play on the field motivating the attitude toward Garrett in this.

Rudolph started the illegal actions, then when he had a chance to get off the field after Garrett retaliated for his actions he instead choose to try to escalate. The worst part about the situation is Garrett's teammates didn't immediately come to his defense, Castro and Pouncey should have been the ones getting hit when they started going after Garrett.

I will say it could benefit the NFL to have a little more competitiveness and hate restored to this rivalry, so even though they're handing out suspensions and talking about discipline they're probably glad for the interest it'll bring.

Jagsordie's comment about kicking Garrett in the head, however, are disgusting.

A blind man could see that it is more toward negative feelings about Garrett than the actual play.  Late hits happen all the time and this one was deserving of a flag at most.  Nothing extremely violent and nothing worthy of Rudolph trying to rip his helmet off because of it.  People trying to say a soft pull to the ground is so excessively violent to make it worthy of Rudolph yanking his helmet out of pain and frustration are just making excuses for him to be the victim.  Players get hit alot worse and "our" own QBs have even been as well.  Starting a fight was never in question and fans may have been pissed, but thats as far as it went.  I've seen OL come to the defense of QBs after hits but never the QB trying to fight the DL, especially when falling on top and not getting driven into the ground.  Rudolph escalated the issue when he could've just got up and let things be.  He clearly pulled Garretts helmet to the point where Garrett was on top of him but others are saying they don't see that.  It could be old age or just bias to support their own viewpoint.  As soon as Rudolph fell on top of him he started yanking at the helmet until Garrett rolled over on top of him and then when Garrett started doing the same then the kick to the groin came.  Some will say Rudolph was trying to get him off of him which is true.  What they wont admit is that he pulled Garrett on top of him by yanking at his helmet first and then when he lost that battle, he ran after him for more.  Bias is the only thing that makes sense and just shows why you cant believe what people say.  Clearly, you always have to watch it for yourself.

Who has said the bolded? 

hint:  nobody has said that nonsense  

You do this all the time.  You weaken your argument by trying to mischaracterize the opposing viewpoint with fiction. It's a terrible way to try to make a point because no one with a brain will take you seriously. 

The hit wasn't late, the take down was.  Rudolph shouldn't have escalated but Garrett should have disengaged prior to that. It doesn't justify Rudolph grabbing the helmet at all - but that could have been prevented if Garrett didn't take it a step too far in the first place.

---

It wasn't blatantly late and he barely even took him down he didn't lead with his helmet...it wasn't helmet-to-helmet he didn't land with his weight on him... It wasn't blatant and Rudolph didn't have the right to defend himself for the hit... nor was it justified.... Are we watching the same play?? Watch it in real time... At what point is Rudolph justified for trying to rip Garrett's helmet off... And kick him in the groin.... If it was such a blatant foul why didn't the ref throw the flag for roughing the passer.... The referee was standing right there and he didn't think it was a blatant late hit

a. I said late takedown, not late hit 
b. I clearly stated in no uncertain terms MR was not justified at all in his retaliation
c. I don't see a kick to the groin - i see the QB trying to separate himself by any means available - still not a good look for MR though
d.  the whole "who started it" business is silly anyway.  Several players behaved terribly. Including Rudolph. You just happen to think the late takedown didn't "instigate." I think it did.  No big deal. 
e. Will people stop telling me to watch it again please? I posted a gif I made of it in this thread. I've seen it 20 times from two angles at multiple speeds, LOL

My apologies for over-analyzing this view i keep seeing from posters.  SO....He pulled Garrett on top of him trying to yank his helmet off.  Then he is, in your words exactly, trying to separate himself by any means necessary.  All, while still pulling Garretts helmet.

I don't even care that you feel the tackle is flag worthy, i actually agree based on the the new save the QB mantra the NFL has.  It's just funny that you think that soft hit initiates a player being that upset once he falls on top of a guy.  I can only imagine what his reaction would've been had he been slammed to the ground or speared into it.  He might've killed the guy lol.

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

a. I said late takedown, not late hit 
b. I clearly stated in no uncertain terms MR was not justified at all in his retaliation
c. I don't see a kick to the groin - i see the QB trying to separate himself by any means available - still not a good look for MR though
d.  the whole "who started it" business is silly anyway.  Several players behaved terribly. Including Rudolph. You just happen to think the late takedown didn't "instigate." I think it did.  No big deal. 
e. Will people stop telling me to watch it again please? I posted a gif I made of it in this thread. I've seen it 20 times from two angles at multiple speeds, LOL

My apologies for over-analyzing this view i keep seeing from posters.  SO....He pulled Garrett on top of him trying to yank his helmet off.  Then he is, in your words exactly, trying to separate himself by any means necessary.  All, while still pulling Garretts helmet.

I don't even care that you feel the tackle is flag worthy, i actually agree based on the the new save the QB mantra the NFL has.  It's just funny that you think that soft hit initiates a player being that upset once he falls on top of a guy.  I can only imagine what his reaction would've been had he been slammed to the ground or speared into it.  He might've killed the guy lol.

Again - not the hit. The subsequent unnecessary takedown that happened well after the hit. 

Not sure how it's so tough to understand the difference.

---

My apologies for over-analyzing this view i keep seeing from posters.  SO....He pulled Garrett on top of him trying to yank his helmet off.  Then he is, in your words exactly, trying to separate himself by any means necessary.  All, while still pulling Garretts helmet.

I don't even care that you feel the tackle is flag worthy, i actually agree based on the the new save the QB mantra the NFL has.  It's just funny that you think that soft hit initiates a player being that upset once he falls on top of a guy.  I can only imagine what his reaction would've been had he been slammed to the ground or speared into it.  He might've killed the guy lol.

Again - not the hit. The subsequent unnecessary takedown that happened well after the hit. 

Not sure how it's so tough to understand the difference.

I understand your separation of the hit vs the takedown.  I just look at it as an all in one tackle.  Player initiates contact and then pulls player to the ground as he is falling to the ground.  To me, just my opinion on tackles, that is one hit, not two different tackles.

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

Again - not the hit. The subsequent unnecessary takedown that happened well after the hit. 

Not sure how it's so tough to understand the difference.

I understand your separation of the hit vs the takedown.  I just look at it as an all in one tackle.  Player initiates contact and then pulls player to the ground as he is falling to the ground.  To me, just my opinion on tackles, that is one hit, not two different tackles.

Exactly!! its one continuous motion... 1 tackle and if his momentum is going that way it's hard to stop... He's 260 something pounds... It's not vicious he practically rolls him to the ground hugging him....

---