Jameis Winston

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well there are officials who have made the very comment about which player that would be involved. I think Kanell is right in that assessment how the media covered this.

Good point. My reading was that he was critical of officials treating players differently. But after reading it again, I think I misread it. It does seem Kanell is critical of the media, fans and pundits, not the officials.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But I heard on another site people talking about Winston and his off-field issues in this situation. If he is to be ejected, that should never be mentioned.

Well, this does put a twist on things. If doing a game and the crew from the previous week warns you about a player that was problematic, I think we are more likely to scrutinize that player. But that is limited to on-field behavior. I agree that off-field behavior should not be a factor.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Since the official involved was not put off by the action, something tells me that there was not a direct confrontation. Something tells me the official understood a confusion or understood what the player was trying to do and used his judgment.

I hadn't commented on it yet, but that is the impression I got from watching the video. I do not think his contact was malicious. I do think it was intentional. But there is a difference between intentionally contacting an official in a benign manner (shaking hands, helping up, pat on the shoulder, etc) and in a malicious manner (shoving, running into, etc). The discussion on here and elsewhere was judging which category this particular contact falls. The officials on the field didn't appear to find it malicious. Insofar as the discussion is focused on that, I don't have a problem. But those discussing the motivations of the officials is problematic.

My original comment about "Intentionally contacting an official is either always a foul or it isn't" should be edited. Perhaps "Maliciously contacting an official is either always a foul or it isn't." Malicious acts are always intentional, and not all intentional acts are malicious. Now, I don't know how the NCAA rule is phrased. But if it is the former, that may be a reason why this discussion is going on.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So we cannot get on Kanell when we have had officials say the very same thing.

Well, since I think I misunderstood Kanell's point, I think that Kanell and the officals are saying different things.