Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

The block on cushing....Slausen fined

EllisUnit

EllisUnit

Vote RED!!!
What gets me is that you can not block a player in the back, and i'm sorry but that was a chop block in the back below the knees. Regardless of if it was legal or not it was still in the back.

I like it how u cant even go low on a QB but a defensive player can get target at his knees or lower in the back and nothing. Total B.S IMO. Either you protect all your players or dont "protect" any of them.

Sorry had to get that off my chest.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000078705/Brian-Cushing-injury

Now tell me what is remotely legal about any of that ?
 
Dirtiest play I've seen in a long, long time and it results in a season-ending injury for one of our most critical players.

Cool. **** the Jets.
 
It was illegal. I know that there's been a thread (or 10) on this..

That said, the long and short of it is (irrespective to the 'ol proximity of the line of scrimmage, or the 'ol "engaged" rule). This had more to do with the direction the block came from. If a lineman makes the block (w/ those other consdiderations above - removed), towards his offensive endzone, all is good. If the lineman makes the block facing towards his own (defensive) endzone, No BUENO!!!!

This is at least how I interpret the "chop block" rules.

In any event, I believe the block to be illegal and a cheap shot.... Note: A cheap shot not necessarily with malice. In other words, dude made a poor decision but I don't necessarily think he attempted to hurt Cush..
 
Texan_Bill said:
It was illegal. I know that there's been a thread (or 10) on this..

That said, the long and short of it is (irrespective to the 'ol proximity of the line of scrimmage, or the 'ol "engaged" rule). This had more to do with the direction the block came from. If a lineman makes the block (w/ those other consdiderations above - removed), towards his offensive endzone, all is good. If the lineman makes the block facing towards his own (defensive) endzone, No BUENO!!!!

This is at least how I interpret the "chop block" rules.

In any event, I believe the block to be illegal and a cheap shot.... Note: A cheap shot not necessarily with malice. In other words, dude made a poor decision but I don't necessarily think he attempted to hurt Cush..
Click to expand...

Hmmm i didnt see any threads on it otherwise i wouldnt of made the thread :cow:
 
I look at the play it looks bad the way Cushing was hit....but you know we make our living on cut-blocks so it's really hard to criticize when one of our own is the victim of a cut block. Really sucks to lose him, really bad break for us and Cushing.
 
Last edited:
A chop block in the NFL is when someone is already engaged by one player and then gets hit at or below the knee by another player.

It is not analogous to the cut blocking which is part of our ZBS.
 
wildroot said:
I look at the play it looks bad the way Cushing was hit....but you know we make our living on cut-blocks so it's really hard to criticize when one of our own is the victim of a cut block. Really sucks to lose him, really bad break for us and Cushing.
Click to expand...

The Texans make their living on LEGAL cut blocks not ILLEGAL clipping.
 
I honestly did not see anything wrong with the block. It is not illegal & I don't think the player tried to do anything other than block Brian Cushing. If you watch it from both Angles, you'll see the guy began the move while Cush was in front of him, however he didn't make contact until Brian was past him. It happens.

Should it be illegal? Maybe, but instead of tweating about it, the defensive stars need to get together & petition the rules comitte the way the QBs did that made that hit illegal on QBs.
 
EllisUnit said:
What gets me is that you can not block a player in the back, and i'm sorry but that was a chop block in the back below the knees. Regardless of if it was legal or not it was still in the back.

I like it how u cant even go low on a QB but a defensive player can get target at his knees or lower in the back and nothing. Total B.S IMO. Either you protect all your players or dont "protect" any of them.
Sorry had to get that off my chest.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000078705/Brian-Cushing-injury

Now tell me what is remotely legal about any of that ?
Click to expand...

Clay Matthews basically said the exact thing on twitter.
 
Fiddler said:
I honestly did not see anything wrong with the block. It is not illegal & I don't think the player tried to do anything other than block Brian Cushing. If you watch it from both Angles, you'll see the guy began the move while Cush was in front of him, however he didn't make contact until Brian was past him. It happens.
Click to expand...
You need to take another look. Or become more familiar with the rule.

CLIPPING
Article 10 There shall be no clipping from behind below the waist against a non-runner. This does not apply
to offensive blocking in close-line play where it is legal to clip above the knee(s), but it is illegal to clip at or below the knee(s).
Penalty: For clipping: Loss of 15 yards.

CLOSE-LINE PLAY
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES
(1) Close-line play is that which occurs in an area extending laterally to the position originally occupied by
the offensive tackles and longitudinally three yards on either side of each line of scrimmage.

CLOSE-LINE PLAY-ROLL-UP BLOCK
(2) In close-line play, if an offensive player’s block (legal or illegal) is followed by the blocker rolling up on the back of the leg(s) of the defender, the action is illegal and is considered unnecessary roughness.
Click to expand...
Slausen was behind Cushing when he made the block. The block was made within 3 yards of the LOS, but the block was below the knee. Illegal as hell, and the result is why there is such a rule in the first place. I think he rolled up on Cushing, and should have been called for unnecessary roughness.
 
I think the hit was illegal. I think it was a guaranteed injury. Knowing the guy and what he's stood for in the past, I don't think he intended to injure Cushing, though. I think the guy got beat and just dove to try and do whatever he could to make the play. Illegal and cheap, yes. Malicious? I'm leaning towards no, but its just my gut feeling

I think it takes a special kind of ******* to purposefully try to tear someone's ACL. Those players usually have dirty reputations. This Slauson guy or whatever his name is has publicly come out against dirty players in the past. I don't know, just feels like a nasty, illegal hit with a very, very unfortunate outcome.
 
Fiddler said:
I honestly did not see anything wrong with the block. It is not illegal & I don't think the player tried to do anything other than block Brian Cushing. If you watch it from both Angles, you'll see the guy began the move while Cush was in front of him, however he didn't make contact until Brian was past him. It happens.

Should it be illegal? Maybe, but instead of tweating about it, the defensive stars need to get together & petition the rules comitte the way the QBs did that made that hit illegal on QBs.
Click to expand...

It was clipping. Inside the Tackles 3 yards in front and in back of the line of scrimmage is the close line area where clipping will not be called on blocks from behind above the knee. Any blocks from behind at or below the knee will be called a clipping penalty. The block was from behind at the knee and to make matters worse it occurred outside the Tackle. In addition, Kubiak mentioned something about it being illegal to cut block someone when the blocker is coming back to the line of scrimmage.
 
Slauson's intent may not have been malicious, but he was gambling with someone else's livelihood when taking a pointless and dangerous risk. No skin off his ass if his hit is mis-timed, and who cares if his target pays the ultimate price? The hit can technically be defined as clipping, so suspend him.
 
Has anyone seen a league ruling or statement on the clip...? Anyone? Don't they usually make a statement and hand out fines on Weds.?? Or is it too soon?
 
I don't know or speculate if it was on purpose


I will say most players play with honor, but if one wasn't playing with honor.. that is cheap to knock out a rival player..

just opened minded out loud thought here and not accusing anyone of anything
 
That's just pure BS!! JMO!

Just curious guys! How much money will Cush lose not being able to finish the year? Any at all? Is there an incentive bonus he will lose? Just wondering.
 
DownByContact said:
I'm noticing a trend here, it's like every week someone gets fined for a dirty hit against the Texans...
Click to expand...

Bingo.

It's time the Texans found a way to send messages to our opponents as legal but as brutal as possible.

The downside of being known as "good guys" is that the dirty guys think they can push ya around a little, an extra shove here...a little clip there. Because the good guys won't fight back, we don't want the penalty yardage on us.

Time to push the limits a little, IMO. Time to send in a reserve for a play or two, if we need to send some chin music to brush em off the plate.
 
gwallaia said:
$10,000 fine to an NFL player is like one of us being fined 25 cents.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Slausen probably lives pay-check to pay-check like many of us. You wouldn't think it, but the more you make, the more you spend & this guy isn't a highly paid NFL star.
 
Rey said:
Low fine. Means NFL finds minor fault.

I agree.
Click to expand...

That's your projection. One commentator even described this as a pretty standard amount for a blocking violation. There have been a couple $7500 fines in the last few weeks.
 
infantrycak said:
That's your projection. One commentator even described this as a pretty standard amount for a blocking violation. There have been a couple $7500 fines in the last few weeks.
Click to expand...

Whatever.

If the NFL felt there was malice behind the hit he'd have been fined more.
 
The bigger picture is that the NFL should make it illegal to block or tackle at the knees from the side and the player you are aiming at does not see you.
 
Dayum....... I posted in another thread where the league fined this fool. Where did that post get hidden amongst all our newer members who feel it necessary to post things like this?


Freakin amateurs!!! No wonder that I spend less and less time here!
 
Fiddler said:
Slausen probably lives pay-check to pay-check like many of us. You wouldn't think it, but the more you make, the more you spend...
Click to expand...
Who knew that Patrick Ewing was a member at TexansTalk?

Slauson has made over $2 million in his 4 years in the NFL. That's a little more than the paycheck-to-paycheck crowd pull in. And $10,000 is 1% of Slauson's $1 million salary for 2012. While 1% isn't nothing (I would notice it out of my salary), it is certainly something he can easily afford and likely won't impact Slauson's playing style.
 
Lucky said:
Who knew that Patrick Ewing was a member at TexansTalk?

Slauson has made over $2 million in his 4 years in the NFL. That's a little more than the paycheck-to-paycheck crowd pull in. And $10,000 is 1% of Slauson's $1 million salary for 2012. While 1% isn't nothing (I would notice it out of my salary), it is certainly something he can easily afford and likely won't impact Slauson's playing style.
Click to expand...

Who knows, he probably has two ex-wives & three Lambos. I'm not saying I know for a fact, but guys who got paid millions are broke shortly after leaving the game, Ricky Williams & VY just to name a few knuckleheads relatively recently.

Dude probably has a $15,000 mortgage & three $1300 car notes.
 
Playmaker said:
The bigger picture is that the NFL should make it illegal to block or tackle at the knees from the side and the player you are aiming at does not see you.
Click to expand...

So you want blockers and tacklers to judge whether or not a guy sees them everytime they hit a guy?

Just say no more going low on anyone.
 
Fiddler said:
I think it would depend on the reputation of the player, or if there were previous infractions.
Click to expand...

So you think that if the NFL thought a player was being malicious or dirty they'd go light on them since it was their first infraction?

That's ridiculous.

If the NFL looked at footage and determined that yes a player was being dirty they'd punish then accordingly.

They didn't feel like that in this case and neither do I.

But those who choose to continue on with the belief that all of our players' fines aren't warranted and all those who oppose us should have been punished more can go ahead and believe that.
 
Rey said:
So you think that if the NFL thought a player was being malicious or dirty they'd go light on them since it was their first infraction?

That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

No your position is blatantly wrong, but keep sticking with it. Players like Harrison who are repeat offenders have gotten hit with heavier fines for lessor offenses because they are repeat offenses.

The contrast between the fines on the two Broncos LB's demonstrates this. One on a player with no track record - barely more than this fine. One on a player who was flagged the week before - much larger discipline.

There are all sorts of missed calls each week and the vast majority receive no action by the NFL. The NFL could have easily sat on this non-flagged play and done nothing if they agreed with you. They didn't. Get over it.
 
infantrycak said:
No your position is blatantly wrong, but keep sticking with it. Players like Harrison who are repeat offenders have gotten hit with heavier fines for lessor offenses because they are repeat offenses.

The contrast between the fines on the two Broncos LB's demonstrates this. One on a player with no track record - barely more than this fine. One on a player who was flagged the week before - much larger discipline.

There are all sorts of missed calls each week and the vast majority receive no action by the NFL. The NFL could have easily sat on this non-flagged play and done nothing if they agreed with you. They didn't. Get over it.
Click to expand...

No you are wrong as per usual when it comes to this particular subject.

We are talking about an initial transgression. Harrisions fines have escalated as a result of his blatant disregard for the rules Aka the NFL determined that there was actual malice or dirtiness behind his hits.

You too trying to argue that the NFL would see a hit, determine there was intent to injure or an element of dirtiness, and only fine the player 10,000 dollars....the "standard fine for a block like that"?

Stop it. That sounds ridiculous X2.

The NFL didn't think there was anything other than an illegal block.

A track record would *ding ding* indicate that there is probably intent or at the very least disregard.

And on top of all that you are either lying or just ignorant to say that there are plays like this that go unflagged and in fined by the NFL all the time. Please.

Do more research. The NFL regularly goes back and fines players for illegal hits. Even ones not resulting in any injury what so ever.

Monday night football. Everyone is watching.

10,000 as a fine says exactly what I believe. The block was illegal, dangerous and should not be done....BUT there was no dirty intent.
 
Rey said:
You too trying to argue that the NFL would see a hit, determine there was intent to injure or an element of dirtiness, and only fine the player 10,000 dollars....the "standard fine for a block like that"?

Stop it. That sounds ridiculous X2.
Click to expand...
I don't think the NFL tries to "determine" if there was intent or not. I would have to believe they would need to at least talk to the player before they make that determination.

1st offense = "standard fine"
2nd offense = more than "standard fine"
3rd offense = more than more than "standard fine"

& so on & so forth

Rey said:
The NFL didn't think there was anything other than an illegal block.

A track record would *ding ding* indicate that there is probably intent or at the very least disregard.

10,000 as a fine says exactly what I believe. The block was illegal, dangerous and should not be done....BUT there was no dirty intent.
Click to expand...

$10,000 to me says they didn't see any previous behavior, they don't believe there will be a repeat offense. Look, if you were right, the NFL would have fined David Stewart more than $7,875 :
Titans offensive tackle David Stewart has been fined $7,875 by the NFL for an unspecified blow to the head during the game against the Texans Sunday.
Click to expand...

& the NFL would have been leveling fines out the wazoo on Vilma, Smith, & the rest of that Bounty bunch... but there are many hits, illegal hits, malicious hits that go unfined.
 
SheTexan said:
That's just pure BS!! JMO!

Just curious guys! How much money will Cush lose not being able to finish the year? Any at all? Is there an incentive bonus he will lose? Just wondering.
Click to expand...

I think as long as the injury happened while "at work" as opposed to a car wreck, players receive full salary. He would probably get paid a SB bonus but would miss out on personal achievement bonuses. The last sentence is an educated guess, the first sentence is 99% for sure.
 
Gee, so happy he got fined 10k. That'll certainly make up for the quarterback of our defense being out for the year.
 
Buffi2 said:
I think as long as the injury happened while "at work" as opposed to a car wreck, players receive full salary. He would probably get paid a SB bonus but would miss out on personal achievement bonuses. The last sentence is an educated guess, the first sentence is 99% for sure.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much Cush could possibly lose just in a personal achievement bonus. I guess it depends on how his contract is structured, but, in Cush's case, I bet he's out a hell of a lot more than $10,000! We have 11 more games, not counting any playoff games, and with Cushs ability to make plays this injury could cost him BIG bucks!! Just wondering about this! Not that familiar with how contracts are structured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top