@RLA, I'm not sure what you mean "the approbation of Sue would demonstrate nothing but hypocracy."wouldn't encouraging the multi-game suspension fo SuH be the opposite of approbation. assuming you mean't the reprimandation of Suh, i still feel you're way off base. if you classify the use of force meant to be exhibited in football as violence, your omitting from you're definition of violence, the fundamental element of Intention. the force used in a football game is for the purpose to stopping a ball carrier, or ont he other hand blocking a defender or gaining yards. violence is force enacted with the purpose of damaging or harming another person. thats why 75% percent of people feel Ndamukong Suh should be suspended for multiple games, not only did he do so between the whistles, but as it appears, he was attempting to inflict an injury, or otherwise harm someone. which has no place in football. Im not denying that many players play the game with that intent, I'm just saying thats not what the game is about, and Im sure many (if not most viewers) would agree that, that is not acceptable. Suh should be given a multigame suspension to get this message across.
oh yeah, UFC on the other hand, thats a different story.
Randy Bear - 12 years ago
Not only should Suh be suspended for three or more games but he should be charged with aggravated assault. His hissy fit action wasn't a football move or anything closely associated to the game, but rather an action demonstrated by a street gang member. His actions should be dealt with the same harshness as he demonstrated on the field for all the children watching the game to see.
So far 75% for multi-game suspension, in a violence oriented sport. In a country that is trying to revive gladatorial battle/blood sport [UFC in PrimeTime], the approbation of Sue would demonstrate nothing but hypocracy.
@RLA, I'm not sure what you mean "the approbation of Sue would demonstrate nothing but hypocracy."wouldn't encouraging the multi-game suspension fo SuH be the opposite of approbation. assuming you mean't the reprimandation of Suh, i still feel you're way off base. if you classify the use of force meant to be exhibited in football as violence, your omitting from you're definition of violence, the fundamental element of Intention. the force used in a football game is for the purpose to stopping a ball carrier, or ont he other hand blocking a defender or gaining yards. violence is force enacted with the purpose of damaging or harming another person. thats why 75% percent of people feel Ndamukong Suh should be suspended for multiple games, not only did he do so between the whistles, but as it appears, he was attempting to inflict an injury, or otherwise harm someone. which has no place in football. Im not denying that many players play the game with that intent, I'm just saying thats not what the game is about, and Im sure many (if not most viewers) would agree that, that is not acceptable. Suh should be given a multigame suspension to get this message across.
oh yeah, UFC on the other hand, thats a different story.
Not only should Suh be suspended for three or more games but he should be charged with aggravated assault. His hissy fit action wasn't a football move or anything closely associated to the game, but rather an action demonstrated by a street gang member. His actions should be dealt with the same harshness as he demonstrated on the field for all the children watching the game to see.
So far 75% for multi-game suspension, in a violence oriented sport. In a country that is trying to revive gladatorial battle/blood sport [UFC in PrimeTime], the approbation of Sue would demonstrate nothing but hypocracy.