Res_Novae Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 What I see::: They talk... Pittman Nods, Taylor nods, Pittman smacks him. My translation--- MP: Wanna step? ST: Lets go MP: *Throws punch* Ref: *Throws Flag* MP: HE SPIT ON ME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meetST Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 There was a thread floating around yesterday touting Sean Taylor and his prowess in all things.After reading that Taylor (Brasky / Norris) thread - would it not be accurate to say that IF Sean Taylor had spit in Pittman's face....Taylor's loogie would have taken Pittman's head clean off? I'm just sayin'.... :laugh: :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think Taylor spit after he got punched, and as he is walking back... but if he did then it would probably be just like a general spit. Maybe the spitting incident occurred after they cut away from the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskinedwizard Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 good point Ferg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 why is spiiting an ejectable foul, but cheap shots like spearing, head blows, knee chopping not? Good point... Even if he did spit on him... Why is he ejected from the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaSkin Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I suspect that Taylor was jawing and some spit came out of his mouth as a result of jawing. We've all seen it and done it. The ref may have seen that and overreacted. However, there is no way that Pitmann should not have been flagged. He threw a punch. That is supposed to be an automatic ejection. How does the guy who commits an act that rules clearly state is an automatic ejection get away without any penalty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNumberOne Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Actually, in my HD replay, I can make out something falling between the two players at one point in the argument. It looks like spit. If it's actually visible on replays, it has to be a big gob of spit. Also, the ref is right there; he may have seen it. The thing is, there's no way to know if it's spit or what. Regardless, there should have been offsetting personal fouls. Spitting should not mean you can be retaliated upon with a blatant hit. I don't think that should be condoned (which the ref did, by not punishing). If Eli_To_Burress is right with his story (source: Cooley), then it's even more ridiculous because the spit was retaliatory, and the ref was RIGHT THERE. There's no way he missed the hit to the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
44RedskinsFan Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 sean taylor never took his mouth pice out that i saw afer the play so and how did he spit..? or if he didnt have a mouth pice...if you got spit in the face wouldnt you jerk back..i mean to think about it it dosent make any sense. you can tell he didnt spit so this is all bull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Gibbs II Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I dont see where pitman looked down at his shirt but he did put his hand on his mouth as if to wipe something. I dont know if he spit, but ST's head jerked a very little before pittman hit him. Even though there is no visual evidence he did, i would not be surprised if it actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttonhook Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I'd like to see this incident parsed thoroughly for a couple of days, until they find the alleged spit, and then set aside to focus on what's important: MOVING THROUGH SEATTLE! The only two thoughts I'll post regarding the incident are: 1] SPIT HAPPENS, and 2] SHOULDA BEEN, IF ANY, OFFSETTING PENALTIES--I DIDN'T SEE NO SPIT BUT I SURE DID SEE THE SLAP TO THE HEAD! :redpunch: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MsThrowbak Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 sean taylor never took his mouth pice out that i saw afer the play so and how did he spit..?or if he didnt have a mouth pice...if you got spit in the face wouldnt you jerk back..i mean to think about it it dosent make any sense. you can tell he didnt spit so this is all bull. If you look closely at the beginning of the footage, you can see ST's mouthpiece in his right hand with his fist kind of balled up....and no one is talking about how ST didnt RELALIATE PHYSICALLY after Pittman took a swing at him...we all know if some one spits on you, retaliation is in mind..but when some one SWINGS ON YOU...YOU REALLY WANNA WHOOP THEIR A-Z-Z....so I think it shows some sort of maturity on the part of our supposed 'THUG' from the U...WE LOVE YOU ST...keep killin em;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 If you look closely at the beginning of the footage, you can see ST's mouthpiece in his right hand with his fist kind of balled up....and no one is talking about how ST didnt RELALIATE PHYSICALLY after Pittman took a swing at him...we all know if some one spits on you, retaliation is in mind..but when some one SWINGS ON YOU...YOU REALLY WANNA WHOOP THEIR A-Z-Z....so I think it shows some sort of maturity on the part of our supposed 'THUG' from the U...WE LOVE YOU ST...keep killin em;) Or (to play devil's advocate), it could mean that ST knew he'd spit and had no right to retaliate. Aside from the spit itself, the evidence (or lack) of Pittman wiping his face is the most compelling thing to me. I saw neither that nor the act of spitting itself. I ask again, has anyone seen video of Pittman wiping himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Or (to play devil's advocate), it could mean that ST knew he'd spit and had no right to retaliate. Aside from the spit itself, the evidence (or lack) of Pittman wiping his face is the most compelling thing to me. I saw neither that nor the act of spitting itself. I ask again, has anyone seen video of Pittman wiping himself? I've seen the video and there is NO evidence of Pittman wiping himself. All he does is pull his mouthpiece out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asnpcwiz Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 This is all because THERE WAS NO SPIT. I posted it yesterday and have watched it several times again in HDTV Tivo...THERE WAS NO SPITTING. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER53 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 My first post. Very good site. If the refs got into the helmets of every face to face squabble then half the players could get ejected. When you are lathered up, angry, excited and exerted some spittle can fly. I did not see him rear back and hock a luggie. Even worse, the ref was Completely Incorrect to ignore the slap to Taylors head. Resoonding to a personal foul with a personal foul does not make the second personal foul disappear. It should have been offsetting penalities at the most and no ejection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fight_on_til_you_have_won Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 What I see:::They talk... Pittman Nods, Taylor nods, Pittman smacks him. My translation--- MP: Wanna step? ST: Lets go MP: *Throws punch* Ref: *Throws Flag* MP: HE SPIT ON ME That was my impression of it too. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I have the game and watched it over and over, first of all if he did spit on Pittman then why didnt he wipe it off, pittman stood there like nothing happened. And next why didnt the Ref throw the flag when he spit, no flag was not thrown untill Pittman took a swing. I have HD and Digital Satellite and I seen Joe Gibbs spit plain as day right after that call but after 20 looks at Taylor and Pitman I still didnt see nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dahogs Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 the spitting never happend....check the video He was ejected for something he said, because on the replay, at the point where many say that Taylor may have spit (when he ever so slightly, in super-duper-extra-slow motion, ****ed his shoulders back for a millifraction of a millisecond) the ref wasn't even looking. Also, what's interesting, is that Taylor was slapped, the ref put his hands on Pittman and backed him up, and then turned back towards Taylor, and then looked upset at something Taylor said and only then did he throw the flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 So, let's see,, Taylor spit in the face of Michael Pittman, a man arrested once for throwing his wife thru a plate glass window, and then arrested again for attempting to kill her and their baby AND their babysitter by ramming the car they were in with his Hummer... and someone is complaining?They should give Taylor a medal for giving Pittman what he deserves. ~Bang :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogers22 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Unlike the NBA players who are ejected aren't immediatly escorted off the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyc123 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 My first post. Three things: 1. Pittman should have been flagged. It's not up to the refs to use their discretion to not enforce a slap to the head. And a slap to the head during a dead ball is an ejectable offense. 2. Will Taylor be suspended? I imagine the video evidence might have something to do with this, as it did with Houshmanblahblah last year...except that the ref was right. Is it going to be the kind of thing where the league office just assumes the ref was right and suspends Taylor for next week? 3. (a personal pet peeve) I love Sean Taylor. I think he's a special player and probably a decent (if immature) guy. Why does everyone keep bringing up Taylor's drunk driving arrest in calling him a problem? He was acquitted of that. In fact, he passed a field sobriety test and was hauled in when he refused a breathalyzer. Let's remember, VA is the South & he's a 21 year black man driving a REALLY nice car. Hmmmm. Sorry about #3, just my personal rant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brown_Hornet Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 He was ejected as soon as it happened. The crowd got pretty loud but when the ref was announcing the 15 yard penalty so you may not have heard it, but he clearly said, "21 has been ejected"It wasn't after the fact. Yea but the conspiracy theory is way better than the truth. The best part is the suggestion that guys with HDTVs had a better view than the officials. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4Ever51 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 My thoughts are, if I am given a 15 yeard penalty for something I didnt do, I might protest a bit, in fact, I would protest a bunch. I see guys in the NFL protest over a 5 yard holding call, let alone a 15 yard penalty. I think Sean knew he screwed up, and knew he should keep his mouth shut. Period. I too, like many, am wondering where the penalty is for what pittman did. Is there a rule that says, and eye for an eye? If he spits on me, I am allowed to smack him upside the head? I cant wait to watch NFL channel this week and find out what the head of officials says in his weekly update on suspect calls. All we have heard so far is our own judgements, we have yet to hear from the actual man in stripes. Should be interesting. I dont believe they will suspend him, but I do believe they will give him a hefty fine. Go SKINS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowGixxer Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 im wondering if it didnt go down something like this. galloway says "damn that dude st is all over me, i cant make a play with him out there". pittman laughs and says " hey i gotta plan". the incident from cincy was all over espn, so of course the refs are going to believe pittman. so he gets in st's face talks some smack and takes a swing, immediately turns to the ref claiming "he spit on me" and returns to the huddle "problem solved". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMONEY Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 There are several people saying(with HDTV replays, mind you) that they couldn't understand how he spat in his face if her was still talking. Maybe a little flew out while ST was smack talking and landed on Pittman's face and he just blew it out of proportion. This isn't like that Bill Romanowski thing where you could actually see the lougie. My thoughts exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.