In defense of our players...

Sep 24, 2013, 2:59 PM

I think fans have unrealistic expectations of nearly all aspects of their own programs. Whether it be wins, or yards given up on defense or whatever. Sometimes we forget that there are other programs who also expect to win. Losing doesn't always mean we are failing, it could simply mean someone else did a better job. It would be a false dichotomy to assume that losing a game represents a bad job, when it is possible that two teams could do very well, and one just have some breaks go their way, or they did just a tony bit better.

Recently, unrealistic expectations have centered around two players, Isaiah Battle and and Martavis Bryant. If many of our fans simply believed that it's good for players to follow the rules, and also that its good when players who break the rules be punished, according to the rules, then I think that would be great. I agree with that wholeheartedly. But that is not what is going on with a lot of people. What is being added to this equation by many people on Tigernet is taking it further and making moral judgments of people. This is being done by bringing in the awkward concepts of "good" and "bad" or "classy" or not. Players are being unfairly insulted and having their characters under public attack. This is wrong in my opinion.

Isaiah Battle has been described as "classless" "thuggish" "cowardly" and other similar adjectives by several people. Now to me, using these words makes the poster look like an idiot. Everyone agrees that violence is a part of the game. Everyone agrees also that it is merely a technicality that certain types of violence are legal and other are not when looking at different sports. What some people seem to be missing is that technicalities are not the basis of morals or "class" or or anything like that. Some of you should look at the actual rule regarding fighting.

ARTICLE 1. Fighting is any attempt by a player, coach or squad member in uniform to strike an opponent in a combative manner unrelated to football. Such acts include, but are not limited to: a. An attempt to strike an opponent with the arm(s), hand(s), leg(s) or foot (feet), whether or not there is contact.
b. An unsportsmanlike act toward an opponent that causes any opponent to retaliate by fighting (Rules 9-2-1 and 9-5-1-a-c).

Battle is obviously guilty of A, but the NC State player, who instigated and threw the first blow, is guilty of A and B. The ONLY reason so many people are freaking out over Battle is because Battle is much bigger and he has great punching form. The NC State player also took a dive which made it look more dramatic. This scenario does not at all fit with the words thrown at Battle that he is "thuggish" or "cowardly." The concept of "Thuggish" comes to the English language by way of colonial India and refers to thieves and muggers. Of course most people slinging that word at Battle are likely unaware of the actual meaning of most words, but it is ridiculous to use such a word about a man who punched another man who deserved it.

In the moral realm, Battle did nothing wrong. Again, he punched a person who deserved it. In the sports realm, Battle made an error in judgment that he should be disciplined for. But all you idiots trying to make it some moral issue need to fix the problems in your own lives rather than try and convict one of our players of some moral transgression. He made a sports mistake. It's that simple.

As for Martavis and the hand gesture controversy. Here are the rules regarding celebration or unsportsmanlike penalties.

Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:
1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules shall use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or engage in such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an opponent, to game officials or to the image of the game, including but not limited to:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent, or imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the ear to request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by which a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon himself (or themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he approaches the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end zone.
(f) A player removing his helmet after the ball is dead and before he is in the team area (Exceptions: Team, media or injury timeouts; equipment adjustment; through play; between periods; and during a measurement for a first down).
(g) Punching one’s own chest or crossing one’s arms in front of the chest while standing over a prone player.
(h) Going into the stands to interact with spectators, or bowing at the waist after a good play.
(i) Intentionally removing the helmet while the ball is alive.

Unless you are going to declare that all these things are equally "classless" then you are a hypocrite for saying what Martavis did was classless. That means Derrick Hamilton was "classless" for hugging the fan in 2003 after the huge TD against FSU. That means that Dwayne Allen was "classless" for saluting troops on military appreciation day because its against the SAME rule.
That means that flashing the "U" sign at Miami after the game was "classless." I say none of them are classless, they are just silly errors that hurt the football team, like busted coverage or holding, or a block in the back. They should be football disciplined, and not chave their character insulted on Tigernet.

This is why Tigernet is full of hypocrites. Some of you are LOOKING for ways to judge others and are not consistent with your judgments. Certain acts you can accept, and certain acts you won't. But the difference is not morality, or the actual rules. It's simply your taste and preferences in human behavior. I say it is "classless" to publicly judge Clemson players on this message board with inconsistent parameters.

Flame away.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

"we just bested you, thus killing the significance of your gesture." For instance, when an alabama player did the money sign and then a throat slash, he was saying, "we are better than you, and your gesture is now defeated."

Why... did you think it meant that he wants to murder people?

Shooting someone the bird is the gesture equivalent of saying "Eff you," which is a way to express disgust or dislike for person or their actions. My wife and I flick each other off all the time sarcastically. People have to create meaning in order to be offended by something like a particular finger.

My whole point is there is nothing actually immoral about the gesture, so people making it a moral issue are misguided.

You seem to be mixing my point with another point altogether with your last sentence. I'm not saying the players should not be football disciplined. I'm saying the players should not have their characters questioned, and that anyone who makes is a "class" or "moral" issue is confused about the world.

In defense of our players...

Sometimes the rules don't capture what is good or bad but we

Are you suggesting throat slashing gestures are....

Tell me what they mean? What does slashing a throat mean?

Throat slashing after another gesture is saying that...

to me, and maybe i'm a dinosaur here....

I totally agree with you.

Re: In defense of our players...

Is this a response to my post?

Are you really comparing....

Are you not realizing the NCAA compares the two?

The difference is....

Do you notice how you just sorta made a declaration

The head of ACC officials even said....

Personally I thought this was unrealistic as well

Here we go

would you say the throat slashing gesture is

c.

You did more to prove many people right

Re: You did more to prove many people right

Pass,...

Re: Pass,...

Obviously I support our coaches and their decision to

TigerBoard POTD