The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 05, 2017, 03:55pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 130
NFL Consistency in Punishments







All three of those plays were flagged by the on-field officials, so maybe this isn't the right place to look for any further thoughts. I have a tough time seeing how all three of those result in a one-game suspension. While all three were penalized, there's also a clear order of which is the "most illegal," and it's obvious enough that I don't understand how the punishment for all three could possibly be equal.

In my view, the Gronkowski video is the only one that could have warranted an ejection. It's an intentional blow to the head of a player on the ground after the play is over. There's nothing "football" about it. The Iloka hit was clearly a solid helmet-to-helmet shot, but at least it was a football play. The Smith-Schuster hit on Burfict was largely shoulder-to-chest with some helmet-to-helmet contact. Appearances certainly weren't helped by the taunting penalty that followed, but I still don't see how it compares in any way to what Gronkowski did.

Slight off-topic. Has the Monday Night Football commentary been this brutal to listen to all year? Some of their comments on the officiating were more along the lines of what I'd expect to hear from Hawk or the Tigers' announce team. Stuff like "nobody's here to watch the officiating" and really just things I didn't expect to hear from a primetime commentary crew.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 05, 2017, 05:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
The harsh reality, you seem to be having trouble accepting is, you don't have to understand. The judgment, as to which penalty applies is (usually) made by the calling official.

At the Collegiate level there are Re-play officials that have the authority to overrule on field judgments.

At the NFL it appears there is an additional level that has authority to apply additional consequences
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 05, 2017, 05:37pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
The harsh reality, you seem to be having trouble accepting is, you don't have to understand. The judgment, as to which penalty applies is (usually) made by the calling official.

At the Collegiate level there are Re-play officials that have the authority to overrule on field judgments.

At the NFL it appears there is an additional level that has authority to apply additional consequences
lol what?

I think you're the one having trouble comprehending, since you basically didn't respond to anything in my post.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 06, 2017, 07:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerUmp View Post

All three of those plays were flagged by the on-field officials, so maybe this isn't the right place to look for any further thoughts. I have a tough time seeing how all three of those result in a one-game suspension. While all three were penalized, there's also a clear order of which is the "most illegal," and it's obvious enough that I don't understand how the punishment for all three could possibly be equal.

In my view, the Gronkowski video is the only one that could have warranted an ejection. It's an intentional blow to the head of a player on the ground after the play is over. There's nothing "football" about it. The Iloka hit was clearly a solid helmet-to-helmet shot, but at least it was a football play. The Smith-Schuster hit on Burfict was largely shoulder-to-chest with some helmet-to-helmet contact. Appearances certainly weren't helped by the taunting penalty that followed, but I still don't see how it compares in any way to what Gronkowski did.

Slight off-topic. Has the Monday Night Football commentary been this brutal to listen to all year? Some of their comments on the officiating were more along the lines of what I'd expect to hear from Hawk or the Tigers' announce team. Stuff like "nobody's here to watch the officiating" and really just things I didn't expect to hear from a primetime commentary crew.
As you noted, your question doesn't pertain to anything that the officials control. Suspensions are purely administrative. I would suggest asking someone in administration these questions, as I surely wouldn't ask an MD how to win a case in court.

As for the commentary, it's been that way on and off for years. Some years it's more apparent than others, but it's always present.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 06, 2017, 12:43pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
This has nothing to do with officiating.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Consistency? What's that? Back In The Saddle Basketball 18 Mon Jul 13, 2009 06:40am
Looking for consistency TrojanHorse Basketball 49 Tue Jun 02, 2009 02:16am
Consistency? lrpalmer3 Basketball 8 Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:06pm
consistency crew Basketball 6 Wed Dec 05, 2001 05:35pm
CONSISTENCY The Bald Eagle Basketball 5 Fri Jan 14, 2000 06:27am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1