Jump to content

Gronk Suspended for One Game by the NFL - Appeal Denied


Recommended Posts

Expected, but disappointed.  What sort of precedent is the NFL setting here?   One game suspension for CLEARLY attempting to injure a defenseless player....AFTER THE WHISTLE!?!

 

If I did that to someone at the supermarket, I’d be going to jail and likely subject to a huge lawsuit.  Complete bull ****.

  • Like (+1) 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And he’s appealing.  Wonder if he will drop the appeal right before the Bills game, to avoid any retaliation.  Nah, why would he be afraid of anyone on this team?

Edited by mannc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Pretty light for a deliberate and dirty hit on a defenseless opponent that resulted in injury after the play was over. 

It wouldn't be, they would launch a full scale investigation and state it was a planned out attack and fine and suspend the player and your coach and take multiple draft picks. Just ask the Saints.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mannc said:

And he’s appealing.  Wonder if he will drop the appeal right before the Bills game, to avoid any retaliation.  Nah, why would he be afraid of anyone on this team 

Especially after what McMarshmello said today in his presser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Seems light, but he will not fight it as missing the Phins game isn't as bad as missing the Steelers game.  (He should have gotten 2 games.)

 

Agree with 2 games, it was a very bad and intentional act. I think the league keeps missing opportunities to make statements on these types of events.

 

This could be the shining example of how seriously the NFL takes head shots. But they’ll slap him on the wrist and that’s it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

After hearing his appeal, Thrash or Brooks should increase his suspension to 3 games for having the audacity to appeal.

 

That was a total scumbag play.

I'd be willing to bet Gronk doesn't even know what appeal means. Thinks it has something to do with bananas most likely.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was cheap, intentional, and after the whistle.  

 

The context doesn't matter.  What he did was wrong and he deserves at least a 1 game suspension.  

 

The fact that he caused a concussion - the bane of the NFL - makes his actions even less excusable.  

Edited by hondo in seattle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Reading this letter makes me wonder how the guy hit Flacco did not get suspended. 

 

lol wasn't that Kiko?

 

At least you could try to make a case it was incidental, even if it's weak. Gronk was just straight up roid-raging out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 4_kidd_4 said:

 

Agree with 2 games, it was a very bad and intentional act. I think the league keeps missing opportunities to make statements on these types of events.

 

This could be the shining example of how seriously the NFL takes head shots. But they’ll slap him on the wrist and that’s it. 

Am I out of line to think Goodell was just scared to give him 3 games?  He is already under full attack by Jerry Jones and let's face it Kraft is not his biggest supporter so maybe he was just scared get two of the most powerful owners after his job? I don't know I fee 3 was warranted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

Of course he's appealing.  That's just pro forma, and a goid thing, since that means it involves the NFLPA.

 

I truly hope that the NFL holds his appeal hearing a week from today, so that he's eligible against Miami, but has to miss the Pittsburgh game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Reading this letter makes me wonder how the guy hit Flacco did not get suspended. 

 

As I said to you before: the two are not even close.

 

Flacco slid a bit late, and Alonso fouled him by making the effort to hit him anyway.  It was a bang-bang play that, yes, could've been a suspension, but not in the same library as purposefully dropping a forearm smash onto a prone opponent who is out of bounds and driving his head into the turf well after the play is over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, thebandit27 said:

 

As I said to you before: the two are not even close.

 

Flacco slid a bit late, and Alonso fouled him by making the effort to hit him anyway.  It was a bang-bang play that, yes, could've been a suspension, but not in the same library as purposefully dropping a forearm smash onto a prone opponent who is out of bounds and driving his head into the turf well after the play is over.

I have stated a few times in this thread I thought Gronk deserved more than 1 game. I was meaning by reading that letter what Alanso did was also a dispensable offense. (Not taking number games just by the way the letter was written.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Calidiehard said:

Haynesworth got 5 games for stomping on a guys face. This deserved more than one the way he launched his armored forearm at a defenseless man.

Haynesworth also had a record of dirty play.  Gronk does not.  Gronk deserves to be suspended as many games as Tre misses, with a one game minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...