Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Football player sucker-punches another

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Football player sucker-punches another
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

crossmr

Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Location: Hwayangdong, Seoul

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:08 am Post subject:

flakfizer wrote:

crossmr wrote:

he had no way of telling who hit him and how. When he turned there was an opposing player standing there. He doesn't know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what.

I see. So if you're hit on your shoulder pads and you're not sure who did it or how, it is reasonable to punch a guy in the head who is nearby and looking the other way.

Given that it was a tense situation, he doesn't know if hout tried to hit him in the face and missed. Hout aggravated a volatile situation and got what he deserved.

roknroll

Joined: 29 Dec 2007

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 4:48 am Post subject:

crossmr wrote:

flakfizer wrote:

crossmr wrote:

he had no way of telling who hit him and how. When he turned there was an opposing player standing there. He doesn't know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what.

I see. So if you're hit on your shoulder pads and you're not sure who did it or how, it is reasonable to punch a guy in the head who is nearby and looking the other way.

Given that it was a tense situation, he doesn't know if hout tried to hit him in the face and missed. Hout aggravated a volatile situation and got what he deserved."

Your bias is obviously obscuring the big picture, trying to zero in on a specific moment (the hit on the shoulder pad and subsequent retaliation) and trying to justify his over-reaction whilst totally ignoring his ongoing infantile tantrums played out on his teamates, coaches, fans, security.

So just try to follow your own 'logic':

Quote:

"Given that it was a tense situation, he doesn't know if hout tried to hit him in the face and missed. Hout aggravated a volatile situation and got what he deserved.

Do tell us how long the 'tense' situation went on for, and how all the others aggravated this 'volatile situation' such that they were the aggressors and Blount is not in the least bit responsible for his actions.

I'd suggest your emotional rationalization for his behaviour has as much strength as a house of cards. If you were to have said, well it may not have been right but I'm glad he hit him, that would have been one thing. To say that this is the way a pro or semi-pro should conduct themselves on the field is quite another. You figure this is a good example for the younger crowd to see?

crossmr

Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Location: Hwayangdong, Seoul

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:05 am Post subject:

Quote:

I never said he wasn't responsible for his actions. I said Hout got what he deserved in the situation. You've made a number of assumptions based on that statement, but I'd guess you're attempt to build an argument has lead your head to somewhere dark and smelly.

I didn't watch the whole game, but read the bits about on-going trashtalk, and build up to the game. Hout had no business smacking an opposing player on the shoulder pads like that. But he'd have to have been an idiot to think that blount would be remotely receptive to that.

Now watch the first replay of it again and pay close attention. Blount turns sees the opposing player and throws a punch. watch what else happens: The couch or whoever that is also comes up and starts pushing hout, which turns him. When Boulton throws the punch, hout is facing him. His head is at best only turned 45 degrees when he's hit and isn't some sneak attack from behind as some people claimed.

and if you want to claim I've got a bias, you'll have to show what that bias is. Frankly I don't even know who these two teams are.

Steelrails

Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:52 am Post subject:

Joe666 wrote:

Was that Simms calling that game, it sounds like him. If it was him, I would like to add a little extra something. I dislike talking negative about a fellow human being, but he's a donkey, plain and simple.

The way I see this, a D1 team was beaten by a high school team and that pissed off a lot of the Ducks. Yes, the player that got smacked, probably said something dumb, but you have to keep your composer, win or lose angry or not. That's why his teammates gave him crap.

I realise it's easier said than done when you play your heart out for 2.5 hours!!

To reiterate what oskinny posted- Boise St. a H.S. Team??? Shocked

Where have you been for this last decade in College Football???

Quite possibly the most poorly researched and least informed statement I have seen on these forums.

roknroll

Joined: 29 Dec 2007

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:08 am Post subject:

crossmr wrote:

Quote:

I never said he wasn't responsible for his actions. I said Hout got what he deserved in the situation. You've made a number of assumptions based on that statement (no, I didn't), but I'd guess you're attempt to build an argument has lead (past tense is led)your head to somewhere dark and smelly. (this is the emotion part i mentioned that is clouding your thought--narrow-minded disregard for the big picture...let's just focus on 5 seconds and rationalize this infantile behavior).

I'm basing my comments on your statements, such as this one:

Quote:

Its not a matter of how hard the shot was. It was a reasonably hard smack. The guy's hand came from above his head and moved his shoulder pad significantly. The important part is that it hit him in the shoulder while he was looking the other way and he had no way of telling who hit him and how. When he turned there was an opposing player standing there. He doesn't know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what.

Moved his shoulder pad significantly?...lol Ok, so of all the shite that happens in pro sports, there are a lot of people who didn't 'get what they deserve'??. So, you're saying here that he deserved a punch to the head because B might have thought that it was some kind of physical attack on him. So when he sees the guy turn away, (probably hears the smack talk) he's now patently in the right to 'defend' himself? Oh, but wait, you mention above :" I never said he wasn't responsible for his action.." So, does this mean he was 'wrong' for doing it, yet H still deserved a punch in the head?

You really go out of your way to rationalize how the blind-sided punch was justified. Do you really think it was some kind of 'fight or flight' response? And just let me say now that I make this based on: "...When he turned there was an opposing player standing there. He doesn't know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what." So by attacking him, this means what in his mind now? This is the 'defense' theory? I'm assuming from the itsy bitsy details that you've ruled out the 'revenge' theory. "..he doesn't know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what"--you don't think that he was actually able to quickly assess the situation (after turning and looking at H and hearing whatever) and just lost his temper and took revenge? How long do you think B stayed 'surprised'? You know, when he was hit by H and was totally mystified.

I like how you say "it's not a matter of how hard" then go on to say "reasonably hard" and the kicker "moved his shoulder pad significantly" --that's hilarious, thanks for the laugh.

I didn't watch the whole game, but read the bits about on-going trashtalk, and build up to the game. Hout had no business smacking an opposing player on the shoulder pads like that. But he'd have to have been an idiot to think that blount would be remotely receptive to that.

Yeah, it was a dumb move on H's part and showed poor sportsmanship. Of course he didn't think the guy was going to like it, are you trying to purport that he did and therefore he's an idiot for thinking that? Or are you saying that 'he'd have to have been an idiot to think that blount would be remotely receptive to that.not attack him with a blind-side punch to the head?

Now watch the first replay of it again and pay close attention. Blount turns sees the opposing player and throws a punch. watch what else happens: The couch or whoever that is also comes up and starts pushing hout, which turns him. When Boulton throws the punch, hout is facing him. His head is at best only turned 45 degrees when he's hit and isn't some sneak attack from behind as some people claimed.

Not that the vid gives the the best angles on it, but whatever the reason for him being turned away and to whatever degree, punching someone in response to that when they have their hands down and a helmet in one, is a 'sneak' attack. Usually when these things escalate, they begin with pushing etc before a punch to the head after a simple pat on the shoulder (let's not waste time trying to say it was too hard, cus of course you can hammer fist them all ya want and the force will be dissipated given the Large pad). The fact is, B surprised him with a punch to the head while (a) H had his helmet off holding it with one hand and was disengaging-had already been walking away and was being 'taken' care of by teamates (b) B had his helmet fully strapped on. So, he's going to punch a guy in the face and keep his helmet on? Quite cowardly on all accounts.

and if you want to claim I've got a bias, you'll have to show what that bias is. Frankly I don't even know who these two teams are.

your arguing some kind of retributive justice "he got what he deserved" yet your support implies that it was some kind of defensive response -he was taken by surprise and thought he was under attack or hinting at something of the sort. your bias is on narrowly focusing on the 5 seconds and not taking the rest of the footage into context. you give excuses about how he was surprised, didn't know if he was attacked and by whom but justified the response of a punch to the face. you even ignore the context of the fight as i mention above in a and b--course he felt braver with his helmet on and H's off and H's teamates/coach/whoever wrangling him in. If you want to 'understand' his frame of mind, try broading beyond the 5 secs or whatever and look at all the footage. This is the quote you pulled:

Quote:

Your basically saying H deserved the punch in the head, justified the unique circumstances of the situation that absolves B of over-reacting. Again you've ignored the big picture in assessing B's mindset. Why don't you continue your 'logic' to the rest of the footage? You know, pushing his own teamate in the face when several of them are trying to restrain him. Then when he separates from them, he delivers a heavier smack to the face of #86. Then he's wrangeld by cops/coaches/etc and going ape over fans heckling him. What would have happened if he were not held back?? The guy lost it, plain and simple.

It will be interesting to see what he says to the press in the coming days, along with teamates, coaches, etc. I'm betting that your going to be one of the few justifying his actions, as I don't even expect him, his teamates, coaches, or managers to give his actions the credence that you have.

sqrlnutz123

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Location: South Korea

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 12:15 pm Post subject:

I agree that he shouldn't have punched the guy, but I do think banning him for the season is extreme. Especially since there is no set disciplinary guidelines (like a yellow or red card in soccer), the coach gets to decide. That Boise player is getting off scott free. If the Duck had punched him unprovoked, then maybe a season long ban would be appropriate, but otherwise no.

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:21 pm Post subject:

sqrlnutz123 wrote:

I agree that he shouldn't have punched the guy, but I do think banning him for the season is extreme. Especially since there is no set disciplinary guidelines (like a yellow or red card in soccer), the coach gets to decide.
That Boise player is getting off scott free.
If the Duck had punched him unprovoked, then maybe a season long ban would be appropriate, but otherwise no.

The guy has anger issues. He went on to punch his cooler-headed teammates who were attempting to cool him down. Suspending him for the season is harsh, but maybe the coaches had had enough and wanted to make sure that neither he nor any other player on the team do that sort of thing again.
As for the BSU guy, what is the BSU coach supposed to do? Suspend him for trash-talking? Half the players in the ncaa would be suspended. Trash-talking is silly, but it doesn't hurt anyone. Punching people in the head is a different matter.

crossmr

Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Location: Hwayangdong, Seoul

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 4:28 pm Post subject:

Quote:

As for the BSU guy, what is the BSU coach supposed to do? Suspend him for trash-talking?

As you can clearly see he smacked him which provoked the attack. He wasn't just trash talking.

Quote:

Moved his shoulder pad significantly?...lol Ok, so of all the shite that happens in pro sports

Quote:

So, you're saying here that he deserved a punch to the head because B might have thought that it was some kind of physical attack on him.

I said he deserved a punch for being an idiot.

Quote:

So, does this mean he was 'wrong' for doing it, yet H still deserved a punch in the head?

Just because someone deserves something doesn't mean we should be the ones to give it to them.

Quote:

You really go out of your way to rationalize how the blind-sided punch was justified.

You really go out of your way to pretend hout has no responsibility for this and make the punch look as bad as possible.

Quote:

I like how you say "it's not a matter of how hard" then go on to say "reasonably hard" and the kicker "moved his shoulder pad significantly"

The point was the blow was hard enough to be significant and definitely not a tap, touch, caress, etc as some people are trying to paint it as.

Quote:

not attack him with a blind-side punch to the head

Now who is emotional? You should check your own bias. You're tripping all over it, bolded, font up.. try some tea.

Quote:

Not that the vid gives the the best angles on it,

Quote:

Usually when these things escalate, they begin with pushing etc before a punch to the head after a simple pat on the shoulder

Hout began it, blount finished it. It went quicker than usual.

Quote:

and was disengaging-

Ah so you support letting people just take pot shots at people and get away with it. That tells us much.

Quote:

Again you've ignored the big picture in assessing B's mindset.

Quote:

. I'm betting that your going to be one of the few justifying his actions,

I was simply pointing out two things. That hout was being an idiot and provoked the attack, had he not smacked Blount on the way by, he wouldn't have gotten punched. Blount was continuing to walk by without even turning his head until Hout hit him. The hit was obviously hard enough to provoke him, regardless of what kind of loving gesture you want to try and pretend it is. Also that because of the nature of the way he hit him, in pro sports its a big no-no. He wasn't getting in his face and shoving him, he was taking a shot from the side which always gets a much bigger response.

roknroll

Joined: 29 Dec 2007

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:21 am Post subject:

crossmr wrote:

Quote:

As for the BSU guy, what is the BSU coach supposed to do? Suspend him for trash-talking?

As you can clearly see he smacked him which provoked the attack. He wasn't just trash talking.

Quote:

Moved his shoulder pad significantly?...lol Ok, so of all the shite that happens in pro sports

Yes it was significant which demonstrates that it is more than a tap or a touch. there are some people who seem to be tripping all over themselves to make it look like Hout was trying to give Blount a gentle caress before Blount popped him, or like above trying to pretend it didn't even happen. The stuff happening in pro sports is usually in sight. Pro sports players never take well to being ruffed up from a direction they can't see. Have you never watched a hockey game? face to face players will push and shove. Someone hits them from behind or the side in the same manner and the gloves are off.

You said "Its not a matter of how hard the shot was." so why do harp on about the 'significantly moved his shoulder pad'--according to you, it could have been a light tap that would also warrant being punched in the face. You keep contradicting your own statements and remain oblivious to it even when it's pointed out to you.

Have you ever watched a hockey game? What would they say about the same situation where a guy smacks another player on the shoulder pads, gets turned away and his other teamates/or coach take him to task over it then the guy who got the smack punches the guy in the face who has his helmet off while still wearing his own helmet and safety shield? If you have the faintest inkling about hockey, then you'll know how cowardly and low down it is. You'll also know that the smack on the shoulder pad wouldn't be considered a risk to the players health (unlike the punch to the face when a player isn't defending himself) and that the punch was an over-reaction and as already mentioned done in a cowardly way. Had he pulled off his helmet, then gave him a shove or indications of attacking then it wouldn't have been cowardly. It still wouldn't be wise, but they are held responsible for their actions. Again, if you know anything about hockey you might have heard of 'agitators' or 'instigators' whose job it is to get under the opponents skin, preferably the better players to get them to take stupid penalties or in a case like this take suspensions from games.

Quote:

So, you're saying here that he deserved a punch to the head because B might have thought that it was some kind of physical attack on him.

I said he deserved a punch for being an idiot.

Again you conveniently ignore your preceding sentences that try to build a case for him being under attack, like it was self-defense. You still haven't said whether it was simply revenge or not. That's because your preoccupied with justifying his actions and don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. You made a case for self-defense (he was hit 'significantly' hard, didn't know 'who hit him and how' and didn't 'know if the guy tried to pop him and missed or what.'). So, did he still feel like he was under attack? Or was he getting revenge? Try answering this one.

Quote:

So, does this mean he was 'wrong' for doing it, yet H still deserved a punch in the head?

Just because someone deserves something doesn't mean we should be the ones to give it to them.

I agree. Just because H deserves a hit, doesn't mean B should be the one to give it to him. He should take it up with the league. Or at least do it with some honor if he can't control himself, which is quite evident.

Quote:

You really go out of your way to rationalize how the blind-sided punch was justified.

You really go out of your way to pretend hout has no responsibility for this and make the punch look as bad as possible.

You mean like this one:

Quote:

"Yeah, it was a dumb move on H's part and showed poor sportsmanship. Of course he didn't think the guy was going to like it.."

So you have trouble with reading and comprehension? Or is it not being able to see the forest for the trees?

Quote:

I like how you say "it's not a matter of how hard" then go on to say "reasonably hard" and the kicker "moved his shoulder pad significantly"

The point was the blow was hard enough to be significant and definitely not a tap, touch, caress, etc as some people are trying to paint it as.

Your use of hyperbole does nothing to strengthen your case. Nobody said 'caress' (though you yourself did say he 'touched him first..."). Of course it wasn't a little pat like a parent may give their child on the head. By the same token, it wasn't anything that would physically hurt him. Christ, players hit each other harder when they celebrate a touchdown. What many are saying, is that the RESPONSE was over the top, ya know not a measured response. Kinda like when someone bumps into us, even if we know they're in a bad mood and even meant it, people generally don't punch them in the face as they continue passing by us. You keep misssing the forest for the trees by getting locked up into the same old thing where it's 'significant' enough to warrant a punch to the face in retaliation (though there's that self-defense theory you got going). In the meantime, you ignore the fact he has a helmet on, the other guy doesn't (which we know is cowardly from your hockey comparison) and he goes on to LOSE HIS MIND ON THE WHOLE VIDEO and needs to be restrained by many types of people (teamates, coaches, security,cops) otherwise it would have been a pathetic display of infantile aggression. Does this not give you any indication of where this guy is at?

Quote:

not attack him with a blind-side punch to the head

Now who is emotional? You should check your own bias. You're tripping all over it, bolded, font up.. try some tea.

Are you denying B attacked him? Or attacked him but it was not 'blind-sided? I believe it was, that's why I state it as fact. Apparently, by describing what happened that makes me 'emotional' here? Had it not been blind-sided, the punch wouldn't have landed at the angle it did and the H probably wouldn't have kept his arms at his sides.

This is what you said:

Quote:

..."But he'd have to have been an idiot to think that blount would be remotely receptive to that."

Ya think? Is this just an awkward statement to mean B wouldn't like it?

Quote:

Not that the vid gives the the best angles on it,

That tells me you haven't watched the vid, you can see multiple angles in the vid. From other angles you can see his head is turned no more than 45 degrees and the coach is pushing on his far shoulder turning him.

The idea of the 'best' means just that, if there were more (cus i said best angles) it would be even more decisive. If you watch it again, and click pause on and off, you will see that H's body is at 90 and when the punch lands his face is at about 90 as well. During the wind up til the impact, his face was about 80ish. You can see from slow-mo, there is no defensive reaction by H at all. When it hits, he's actually looking towards a teamate (where exactly he was looking, can't tell because like i said it doesn't give the best angles obviously due to the lack of cameras involved). I don't agree with your 45 degrees, look again in slo-mo. Also, look at the beginning of this :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0kk-LQ5IgI and you will see how much of a tap it really was.

Quote:

Usually when these things escalate, they begin with pushing etc before a punch to the head after a simple pat on the shoulder

Hout began it, blount finished it. It went quicker than usual.

Yes, Hout began it and Hout disengaged with the help of his trainer or whoever that was, so it was finished then. Then Blount sucker punched him while he kept his helmet strapped on, then backpedalled away quickly and quite proud of his cowardly act.

Quote:

and was disengaging-

Ah so you support letting people just take pot shots at people and get away with it. That tells us much.

Yes, that does tell alot--you calling the 4 finger tap on a football shoulder pad a 'pot shot'. Yep, guess I'd be guilty of telling people not to lose their minds and jeopardize their career by doing cowardly, stupid ass shite. So you're kinda advocating the prison mentality, yeah shows alot doesn't it.

Quote:

Again you've ignored the big picture in assessing B's mindset.

Speaking of which do you know what Hout said? I don't think that has been reported. It has happened that some players, even pro athletes, have hurled racial insults or worse during those interactions. If you don't want to ignore B's mindset you might not want to say anything until that is reported.

So your trying to use the 'possibility' of a racial slur to justify his actions throughout the video? The big picture here is that he doesn't lose his mind over whatever to jeopardize his career and his team's reputation. Obviously, when these things are reported (racial slurs) the impact is quite large. The players apologize to everyone (the player, their teamates, coaches, owners and the fans) and that incident is remembered for some time. This isn't a drunken bar room brawl, gang activity in the steet, or life in the pen. Whatever got him worked up, clearly he has serious anger issues and doesn't have the self-control or class to rise above it.

Quote:

. I'm betting that your going to be one of the few justifying his actions,

"the nature of the way he hit him" --kinda like some major disrespect in prison, they just gotta stick ya or do ya in?

"a big no-no" ---so his response was fully justified and what B did was not a "no-no"?

It's quite amazing you can go through all of this without addressing the questions directly. You take little pieces of a quote, ignore answering simple questions, imply something other than what's obviously writtten, and even worse contradict yourself.

Was it 'defense' or 'revenge'? You gave the defense theory but now you're implying that it was justified revenge--a big no-no in pro sports, like he sucker punched B and B was just doing the same. Wtf? You tried to say before that he didn't know who hit him or if Hout actually tried to hit him and missed. But if you look at the video again, this is the farthest thing from reality. He knew who hit him and it was pure retaliation. I don't expect you to address this cus it will be the same old same old--you can't back up your own words so you try to put words in others mouths.

How about the rest of the Blount performance. Was this a bit childish ya think? Is it also to be justified all due to Houk starting it?

Anyway, nuff said and if you can't deal with reasoning, answering the questions directly and resorting to hyperbole, then don't bother replying at all.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe