But being a football player is like being a Christian “Sola Scriptura” … both will suffer pain in life no matter what…
As a Christian one suffer by default due to their faith… we also self inflict suffering by not following Christ as we should: Hence suffering will happen no matter what so “accept life for what it is”
Players suffer by default just by playing the game and the relentless pounding… and then they also suffer because other go out of their way to hurt them while playing… Swift is accepting that fact - that he will sooner or later suffer by default for just being a player or by it being inflected by another in the field in purpose…,
I’m not watching the play but if it was blantant them fine h if not ok what … it happens sadly
I’m not asking Chase Young . I asked you …Since you see nothing wrong with it , I would agree with it’s just football if Swift was standing/running and it was one motion (Chase grabbing and slinging Swift down for the tackle) it was not the case . He purposely and unnecessarily tried to inflict harm when it was not needed in the act of making the tackle.
I’m sure it would have been reviewed after the fact if Swift had laid on the ground or was knocked out from it. Swift getting right up and with no report of injury probably played a role in why the play was not scrutinized .
No …I asked what was the intention. Obviously Chase is not available .
If you view the play and you do what he did on the last 2 feet of someone going to the ground …is that to tackle, strip the ball , stop a 1st down …or to cause harm.
Why would you do what he did at the end on that play ?
Thanks for the video - yes it was definitely that play. I don’t think you could flag him for anything other than unnecessary roughness. But, given all the other protections in place, that type of hit should probably be added to the list of ‘not legal’.
If he had done that to Rogers, there would be an emergency new rule in by this week that outlaws that type of hit.
I agree …if the ground could cause a fumble (it can’t) it’s a great end to the play in an attempt to dislodge the ball. I’m all for violent hits… if the reason is to stop production on the play ( a catch , cause a fumble, even to make it so the player remembers you …so long as it is in the act of something positive happening on the play other than …I want to hurt you.
That’s what makes this a great country, I don’t share your view and would say, “That’s going to make him think twice about running at Chase.” Am I right? I think so. We are both entitled to our opinion.
I agree he will remember it . That’s not the point though . That was not what you were saying or what I was asking …
You view that play and see it as
I asked you to explain that act at the end , you did not . That’s moving the Goal Post .
That quoted statement means you condone an act that had no intention other than to hurt a player. That act… Chase purposely whipping him at the end had no purpose related to Football .
OK I was trying to play nice. Blow me, I owe you nothing. I have absolutely no requirement to answer any question you ask. It does NOT mean that I condone it, it means I understand it. WTF, moving the goal post, LOL, go fish …