williams fined for cheap shot on coles.
 

[b]according to espn news,cowboys cb roy williams was fined 7,500$$$ for his helmet to helmet hit on lavernaus coles monday night.in case everybody forgot,the referees missed it,and never threw a flag.in other news,comcast just announced that chad morton is out of sunday's game against clevland.ladell betts will return kickoffs,and james thrash will return punts.[/b]

Good, if LaVar gets fined for a facemask, Williams definitely deserves a fine for that shot. Should have been called, but oh well, sucks for us.

[URL=http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Royhit.mpg]Roy Hit[/URL]

This is a bullshit fine...but at least Jeana Washington is[b] (sanitizied version of consistent)[/b]


If you play this frame by frame, one will notice that Roy's shoulder makes contact with Coles FIRST. Then Coles is launched backwards by the impact

Roy WAS NOT HEADHUNTING on the play...

Clean hit

Don't care if he was or wasn't headhunting or if his pads hit first. Helmet to helmet contact on a helpless receiver is illegal.

By the way... we don't need that kind of language here.
Climb back into your hole, please.


[QUOTE=la73hof][url="http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Royhit.mpg"]Roy Hit[/url]

This is a bullshit fine...but at least Jeana Washington is[b] (sanitizied version of consistent)[/b]

If you play this frame by frame, one will notice that Roy's shoulder makes contact with Coles FIRST. Then Coles is launched backwards by the impact

Roy WAS NOT HEADHUNTING on the play...

Clean hit[/QUOTE]

Just another reason to say that those refs from MNF should be checked for favoritism or brain cells.

[QUOTE=EEich]Don't care if he was or wasn't headhunting or if his pads hit first. Helmet to helmet contact on a helpless receiver is illegal.

By the way... we don't need that kind of language here.
Climb back into your hole, please.[/QUOTE]

All we've heard here (and to be expected) is the favorable calls the Skins got...BUT (Thanks to AdamJT13)

All of Washington's points came as a result of questionable calls. If Portis had been ruled down, they wouldn't have gotten a field goal. If Wiley hadn't been flagged for slapping Brunell's shoulder, they wouldn't have scored their first touchdown. And if Gardner had been flagged for pushing off Reeves to make his first long catch, they wouldn't have gotten their touchdown or two-point conversion. So even if they'd gotten the PI on Newman, they'd have scored three or maybe seven points total. And even if Glenn had been called for PI, the offsetting penalties would have left us with a third down at the Redskins' 41 -- still a potential drive for a field goal or touchdown. And regardless of any of that, we did have two touchdown drives completely unaided by questionable calls.

[QUOTE=EEich]Don't care if he was or wasn't headhunting or if his pads hit first. Helmet to helmet contact on a helpless receiver is illegal.

By the way... we don't need that kind of language here.
Climb back into your hole, please.[/QUOTE]

What language? :confused-

[QUOTE=la73hof]All we've heard here (and to be expected) is the favorable calls the Skins got...BUT (Thanks to AdamJT13)

All of Washington's points came as a result of questionable calls. If Portis had been ruled down, they wouldn't have gotten a field goal. If Wiley hadn't been flagged for slapping Brunell's shoulder, they wouldn't have scored their first touchdown. And if Gardner had been flagged for pushing off Reeves to make his first long catch, they wouldn't have gotten their touchdown or two-point conversion. So even if they'd gotten the PI on Newman, they'd have scored three or maybe seven points total. And even if Glenn had been called for PI, the offsetting penalties would have left us with a third down at the Redskins' 41 -- still a potential drive for a field goal or touchdown. And regardless of any of that, we did have two touchdown drives completely unaided by questionable calls.[/QUOTE]

I think that if you're saying that the ref's were playing in the skins favor I would have to question exaclty what you were seeing. I think the skins got some awful breaks on a pass interference call and a non-pass interference call. That could have made 7 more points for the skins and 7 less points for the 'girls.

In regards to the Portis call I wrote this: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In reference to the Portis call, now correct me if i'm wrong, but it appeared that a person made contact with Portis and then after that person's contact with Portis ended (w/o his knee ever touching the ground) THEN Portis's knee touched the ground. Now, I thought that the rule was that a player's knee can touch the ground as long as no one touches him while his knee is on the ground.

So what exactly is the rule?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, I think saying that without that roughing the passer call that we wouldn't have scored is ridiculous, because in a game plays like that are always going to happen and in that instance it did. The Redskins beat the 'girls everywhere except for on the scoreboard it seems.

:httr:

BTW, are you even a skins fan? (just curious)

[QUOTE=Winskins]I think that if you're saying that the ref's were playing in the skins favor I would have to question exaclty what you were seeing. I think the skins got some awful breaks on a pass interference call and a non-pass interference call. That could have made 7 more points for the skins and 7 less points for the 'girls.

In regards to the Portis call I wrote this: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In reference to the Portis call, now correct me if i'm wrong, but it appeared that a person made contact with Portis and then after that person's contact with Portis ended (w/o his knee ever touching the ground) THEN Portis's knee touched the ground. Now, I thought that the rule was that a player's knee can touch the ground as long as no one touches him while his knee is on the ground.

So what exactly is the rule?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, I think saying that without that roughing the passer call that we wouldn't have scored is ridiculous, because in a game plays like that are always going to happen and in that instance it did. The Redskins beat the 'girls everywhere except for on the scoreboard it seems.

:httr:

BTW, are you even a skins fan? (just curious)[/QUOTE]

la73= Larry Allen, number 73

HOF= Hall of Fame

Need I say more? ;)

haha...shoulda known

:rolleyes:

Stop the whining and bitching people. Cowboys won, we lost. Lets move on and hopefully we won't get the shaft from the refs next time we play (don't even front about that shit either). See you Dec 26.

to be fair,the skins got some shitty calls but the officatting sucked all away around.i hate dallas with a passion,but there were a few bad calls on them too.most of the cowboy fans that are my friends are good folks,of course you do run into the ocassional cowboy fan who is truly a legend in his own mind.

[QUOTE=saden1]Stop the whining and bitching people. Cowboys won, we lost. Lets move on and hopefully we won't get the shaft from the refs next time we play (don't even front about that shit either). See you Dec 26.[/QUOTE]

Dec. 26? Where are you going? Def Poetry Jam World Tour?

I thought you were a skins fan smoot....Dec 26 is our 2nd game against the Boys.

Def Poetry is my kind a shit though.

[QUOTE=la73hof]All we've heard here (and to be expected) is the favorable calls the Skins got...BUT (Thanks to AdamJT13)

All of Washington's points came as a result of questionable calls. If Portis had been ruled down, they wouldn't have gotten a field goal. If Wiley hadn't been flagged for slapping Brunell's shoulder, they wouldn't have scored their first touchdown. And if Gardner had been flagged for pushing off Reeves to make his first long catch, they wouldn't have gotten their touchdown or two-point conversion. So even if they'd gotten the PI on Newman, they'd have scored three or maybe seven points total. And even if Glenn had been called for PI, the offsetting penalties would have left us with a third down at the Redskins' 41 -- still a potential drive for a field goal or touchdown. And regardless of any of that, we did have two touchdown drives completely unaided by questionable calls.[/QUOTE]

I already knew you were a boys fan la73hof. So why are you here, to gloat about the game that you should have lost?

This language:

[QUOTE=la73hof]

but at least Jeana Washington is[color=red][b] (sanitizied version of consistent)[/b]
[/color]

[/QUOTE]
I could understand that a cowboys fan might not be able to spell really well... but I'm pretty sure it was intentional.

[QUOTE=la73hof]This is a bullshit fine...but at least Jeana Washington is[b] (sanitizied version of consistent)[/b]

If you play this frame by frame, one will notice that Roy's shoulder makes contact with Coles FIRST. Then Coles is launched backwards by the impact

Roy WAS NOT HEADHUNTING on the play...

Clean hit[/QUOTE]

No, ACTUALLY, this is a BULLSHIT post by a guy as blind as the officials were in that game. They missed this blatant foul AND THE TWO OTHERS THE NFL LATER APOLOGIZED FOR THAT COST THE SKINS 14 POINTS. I looked at that film, and saw the same thing the NFL experts did. His head flew back faster than his shoulders. Any way you cut it, it was a helmet-to-helmet spear. Typical of the cheap shots South America's team like to dish out. Maybe his shoulder (or pinky or some other body parts) hit at the same time. That has no bearing on the foul. Roy was driving at Coles' head with his helmet. But no need for all the tears, he can afford the $7500.

[QUOTE=saden1]I thought you were a skins fan smoot....Dec 26 is our 2nd game against the Boys.

Def Poetry is my kind a shit though.[/QUOTE]

I misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying that you'd see us all again on Dec. 26, as if you weren't going to be posting [U]at all[/U] until then. And I couldn't figure out why

EEich-

Thank you for the gentle reminder.

To all posters on this board:

Regardless of your fan affiliation, we at [URL=http://thewarpath.net]The Warpath[/URL] require that your language remain appropriate. The C-bomb never is.

As always, we welcome fans of all NFL teams to join in insightful commentary. We also accept thoughtless bragging, pointless name calling, and careless rants. Profane and personal attacks aren't our bag.

The rivalry is back
 

I took my dad to the game Monday night and I agree that we beat them in every aspect except the score. I will say that it was a good, hard-hitting game but bad officiating ruined it. I also went to the Dallas game last year (that 27-0 loss) and there probably weren't more than 70,000 people there, nearly half of them Cowboys fans. This last time, the stadium was packed out, and I joked with a couple of Cowboys fans behind me that they were the only ones in the stadium. I may hate the Cowboys, but like mentioned earlier, I have a lot of respect for them (especially Landry). The Cowboys are probably the only thing from Texas that I don't like. As we were leaving the stadium, one of those Cowboy fans made a good point: "Yeah, we (the Cowboys) may have won, but the rivalry is back." We'll be back in December to kick some Cowgirls ass.

BrudLee,

Thanks for cleaning up that classless slur.

These hits happen all the time in the NFL and I don't think safeties should be finded for them. Since the NFL fines everyone I think Roy should be fined, only because that's the precedent. Hits like this are part of the game and they're not cheap. If a wide reciever puts himself out there, he knows the risk.

The NFL is trying to prevent broken necks and brain injuries. If the rule prevents one catastrophic injury, it's a good rule.

[QUOTE=jdlea]These hits happen all the time in the NFL and I don't think safeties should be finded for them. Since the NFL fines everyone I think Roy should be fined, only because that's the precedent. Hits like this are part of the game and they're not cheap. If a wide reciever puts himself out there, he knows the risk.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely a critical and GOOD rule. The last theng the NFL needs is WR's carted off paralyzed for life. That is what would happen if those hits were allowed - they would be so commonplace that many serious injuries would occur. When the rule first went into effect against clotheslining, I did not like it either, because it was the bread and butter of our own Chris Hanburger. It was great seeing those guys flipped in the air. Problem was, it was EXTREMELY dangerous. And another thing: you have to remember that just in the last few years, there has been a major emphasis on bodybuilding in the NFL. The players are all MUCH more powerful and MUCH heavier than they used to be. That intensifies the problem. You get a 250 pound LB spearing the head of a 170 pound WR going over the middle, look out. I don't want to see those injuries.

I agree that helmet to helmet hits can not be permissible, but didn't they have that as a rule emphasis a year or two ago? Which caused huge fines for hits that didn't look like anything more than just a huge hit?

I'm all for punishing truly dangerous hits, but I also want players to hit hard when someone comes across the middle (namely the Washington Redskins!)

there was a guy from green bay who got fined for doing the same thing to payton manning.who did LA get fined for yanking the face mask of?

Tiki Barber. Didn't even get a flag for it in the game.

[url]http://esc25.midphase.com/~smithj/facemask.gif[/url]

Now..tell me more about hypocrisy...

[QUOTE=Daseal]I agree that helmet to helmet hits can not be permissible, but didn't they have that as a rule emphasis a year or two ago? Which caused huge fines for hits that didn't look like anything more than just a huge hit?

I'm all for punishing truly dangerous hits, but I also want players to hit hard when someone comes across the middle (namely the Washington Redskins!)[/QUOTE]

DEFINITIVE PROOF there was no helmet to helmet contact from a new and best angle of the hit:

[url]http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Newhit.mpg[/url]

It looked like helmet to helmet to me, though not as obvious as the helmet to helmet hit RW lay on his teammate Terence Newman right after the play

[QUOTE=smootsmack]It looked like helmet to helmet to me, though not as obvious as the helmet to helmet hit RW lay on his teammate Terence Newman right after the play[/QUOTE]

Newman is way overrated

I remember being at the draft wanting Terrell Suggs, Leftwich, or Kevin Williams over Newman

Newman is a great young player, but definitely not Suggs or Leftwhich.

The only player hurt by one of these "life threatening" hits was Darrell Jackson. That hit wasn't even helmet to helmet. They only threw the flag because he didn't get up. I don't care about players who miss 2 plays because they're shaken up, that's football.

All of you who think that they are outlawed to protect against injury are correct. However, this year more players are out because of injury, at this point in the season, than in any other year the NFL has been existence. Those stats include when they were AFL and NFL when Jack Tatum and Deacon Jones were doing all of the things that we consider illegal today and more plays are hurt in this era when these hits aren't allowed.

[QUOTE=jdlea]The only player hurt by one of these "life threatening" hits was Darrell Jackson. That hit wasn't even helmet to helmet. They only threw the flag because he didn't get up. I don't care about players who miss 2 plays because they're shaken up, that's football.

All of you who think that they are outlawed to protect against injury are correct. However, this year more players are out because of injury, at this point in the season, than in any other year the NFL has been existence. Those stats include when they were AFL and NFL when Jack Tatum and Deacon Jones were doing all of the things that we consider illegal today and more plays are hurt in this era when these hits aren't allowed.[/QUOTE]

You just totally made the point for outlawing the hits. Better job than any of us on the earlier posts. With all the injuries occurring now because of the MUCH MUCH larger, stronger, faster players, and the rules passed in recent years outlawing the most vicious and dangerous hits, just imagine how many they would be carting of the field with career ending injuries if they had NOT passed these rules!!!!! Good proof, jdlea!!

[QUOTE=la73hof]DEFINITIVE PROOF there was no helmet to helmet contact from a new and best angle of the hit:

[url="http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Newhit.mpg[/QUOTE"]http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Newhit.mpg[/QUOTE[/url]]

sorry,but the nfl sees different.willams has been fined 2 or 3 other times for helmet to helmet hits has'nt he?

[QUOTE=BIGREDSKINFAN63][QUOTE=la73hof]DEFINITIVE PROOF there was no helmet to helmet contact from a new and best angle of the hit:

[url="http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Newhit.mpg[/QUOTE"]http://jaybauer24.tripod.com/cowboysvids/Newhit.mpg[/QUOTE[/url]]

sorry,but the nfl sees different.willams has been fined 2 or 3 other times for helmet to helmet hits has'nt he?[/QUOTE]

True..Woodson too

Arrington has had his pocket picked a few times too

And then the hypocrisy is how the NFL takes the "fine" hits and sells them on Crunch Course and etc

hixon's son got in a helmet to helmet, last i heard, he was still in a coma, though it looks like he's gonna pull through now.