Chachie Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 I just posted in another thread about Sean Taylor's obvious anger management problems and I'm sure Michael Pittman is no stranger to some A.M. classes or programs. Is it any wonder that these were the two players involved? Helloooooo, Friends! Spit has been spotted on Tivo and hi-def and "F"ing crystal balls all over the NFL. I can also imagine that spit would beget a swing. What would beget spit? What was said to Sean to inspire such disgust? Only Sean and Michael Pittman can tell the world that. Two highly flammable personalities on a collision course. Pittman shouldn't feel vindicated by the outcome and Taylor should indeed look inside before he embarks on the rest of his career. (Oh, and his upcoming court appearance.) So sayeth the judge of all others and your personal guide to higher echelons of human dignity, Chachie. :bow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brown_Hornet Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 The ref did not/has not said he saw it. He merely stated Taylor did. Pittman could have hoaxed him into it. I would like to know why the ref didn't throw a flag until after Pitman hit Taylor. If the ref did indeed see Taylor spit, why was the flag not thrown immediately ROTMFFLMELAO...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 i think he probably did spit; but i did think that their should have been offsetting penalties with Sean Taylor being ejected still. spitting is a bad thing; i think that is like a lesson most learned in preschool during recess.and pittman isn't a wife beater - he's a wife runner over with my benz-er. he tried to run his wife over. Even OJ was like, "damn, that's cold" I agree completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Innocent until proven guilty is all I have to say about that!!!! Plus Trotter is a scumbag T.O. lovin' bum!! Just a thought! As Johnny Cochran would say, if he didn't spit, you must acquit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 It has got back to the spitting did it or did it not happen thing again ... Westbrooks point was the inconsistency of the refs decisions and I agree with him it is very wrong that a player should commit an offence in one game and be ejected and another player commits the same offence in another and gets away with nothing . I would like to find out why these calls are non reviewable . Refs make mistakes all the time ... all the time and more and more games are getting decided not by the play on the field but on a bougus call. This coupled with the inconsistency (Pittman not getting even flagged) seriously brings the impartiality of the officials in to doubt. There are times when playing certain teams at home (in the 80s it was always the 9ers) when it looks like your team is up against 13 men with the officials firmly on the side of the home team . The worst thing is if a ref knows or feels he has made a bad call in the first half he will often try and "rectify his mistake" by penalizing the opposing team unfairly in the second half . On another thought though just thinking about Taylors spitting or not, the only reason he really has this reputation is because of the Bengels WR Hahshqsxnxnnxajnxcas (sp?)allegation and that was never up held. Taylor only got fined $17,500 (only ha!). If spitting (and as it has been said … spitting through his helmet, and mouth guard) was bad enough to get ejected for do you not think the fine should have also sent a signal? Portis got more than that for uniform infraction ....makes you think though . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfn Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Wow Westbrook, I don't think everyone got your point. I can't believe people are giving you trouble on this one. I agree with you Pittman should have been ejected also. It's not the refs job to determine whether a punch to the face is warranted. He's to hand out the punishment for the action as the rulebook states it. By the way, I was watching the NFL channel yesterday and I ran the incident back on TIVO and Taylor DID spit on him. Not in his face though. It landed on the right side of Pittman's chest. So, throw out the arguement of "Why don't we see Pittman wipe his face". I don't have some 55" HiDef plasma as some have stated they have. I have a 6 yr old 36" tv. Nothing special and I was able to spot it. I think the call on the field should have been offsetting personal fouls. :seahawksu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.