Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    So what makes you think he wouldn't have been cleared, considering that he was cleared to play the very next week?
    I guess I don't get what you're getting at.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

      Blame falls on both RG3 and Shanny. Both egos got the in the way of a smart decision.

      Of course, pro sports are filled with millions of atheltes lying about how healthy they are.

      It falls on the coach, but coaches have been overruled by the lines of Ben Rothlesburger, Jordan, LT, TO (blind in the SB and lied about how healthy he is)....the list could go on and on.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
        I guess I don't get what you're getting at.
        That because he was cleared to play against the Seahawks, I'd venture to guess he would have been cleared to re-enter the game against the Ravens.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

          I still don't understand your point. The kid was clearly hurt and compromised. Whatever factors involved, whether RG3 himself was careless in handling his own injury... or Shanahan was careless in his handling of RG3's injury... or the medical staff was careless in their handling of RG3's injury --- the kid was clearly injured, against Baltimore, and two more times against Seattle, and yet there was Griffin shuffling up to the line of scrimmage late into the 4th quarter on a leg almost dangling from his hip.

          There was a breakdown in caution and responsibility. The tweaking and re-injuring continued to occur and yet he remained out there until finally his knee completely buckled on a rather inconspicuous play. It was mishandled.

          The entire thing didn't need to happen. My point with Griffin is, if he did indeed say he was "fine", that's still not really his place to say --- he's not a doctor. And he's a rookie. He's not Michael Jordan, he's not Peyton Manning, so "overriding" his coach really isn't an option at this point. Shanahan and now it appears Andrews dropped the ball in dictating to RG3 that he should call it quits and get it properly treated. That's my honest opinion.
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-08-2013, 02:16 PM.
          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

            I don't know of any other way to really say it.

            He wasn't cleared to re-enter the Ravens game, but considering he was cleared to play against the Seahawks, I think it's safe to assume that had Andrews looked at him during the Ravens game, he would have been cleared to re-enter the game.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

              He was also cleared for the DAL game

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                Now I'm seeing more details I obviously overlooked. We're talking about week 14 against the Ravens. He was cleared to play 3 more games before the Seahawk game, where he tore up his knee.

                This is really much-to-do about nothing.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  I don't know of any other way to really say it.

                  He wasn't cleared to re-enter the Ravens game, but considering he was cleared to play against the Seahawks, I think it's safe to assume that had Andrews looked at him during the Ravens game, he would have been cleared to re-enter the game.
                  I don't think that's a safe assumption at all, lol... I think it's very possible that he would've held him out. He still may have been cleared for the next game.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                    If you don't think he would have been cleared to re-enter the game, then how did he manage to get cleared for 4 more games afterwards?

                    Your knees don't heal that fast. If he had a knee injury severe enough to pull him from a game, then I'd feel safe to assume it's severe enough to sit him down for the following games. He's not going to heal enough to go from unable to play, to being able to play in 5-6 days with a knee injury like that.
                    Last edited by Since86; 01-08-2013, 02:41 PM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                      Well 1) he wasn't cleared for the next 4 games, he sat out the very next game.

                      2) During the Baltimore game, he went back in and crumpled to the ground. Do you remember that game? He came back in and crumpled to the ground and was pulled anyway:

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyuQ3PImbNs

                      How good would that have made Andrews look if he had actually performed a sideline exam and says "looks good to me" and then a few plays later Griffin crumples to the ground on his own after a seemingly innocuous play. Whether he was cleared or not is moot. The point Andrews was making was that he didn't even get to LOOK at Griffin and make a sound diagnosis before Griffin went trotting back in. Griffin's knee improved tenfold in like 3 days, do you not remember that whole story? Yes, it's completely possible to hold someone out of the rest of a game and he's back by the next, when you're 22 and have the methods that are available today, you can make significant improvements quickly. But that doesn't mean your knee is structurally sound.

                      I still don't understand your underlying point. Griffin is injured man, he was injured multiple times and he was not reeled in like he should have been, starting with the Baltimore game.
                      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-08-2013, 03:10 PM.
                      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                        HIs point seems simple to me (correct me if I am wrong Since)

                        Andrews ran his mouth on how he did not clear RG, but now he is backtracking saying "I did not see him after the BAL injury".

                        Since's point is how was he cleared for the PHI, DAL and SEA game?

                        My question is why the hell was Andrews not more assertive. If I am a world renowened DR (and you guys all say this guy is a medical genious, and I take your word for it) I do not simply let the player run in circles on the sideline and not even look at him.

                        I either am in the coaches ear, or after the game I am saying screw you guys, if I cannot even look at the guy then I will take my happy *** home cause you dont care what I have to say".

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                          That's not what I got at all from Andrews.

                          What I got from Andrews was that he didn't get a chance to look at Griffin directly after he injured it against Balt, before Griffin went back out on the field. Once Griffin crumpled the second time, and was yanked, then it sounds like he was able to do proper tests, whether after the game, or whatever.

                          I can't speak for "assertiveness". We don't know what happens on the sidelines. The physicians may not have a ton of say on matters if a player is running around on the sideline seemingly okay. The coach is probly pressuring him to get back out there anyway.

                          But I can say that between the coach and the medical staff, proper procedures weren't followed to ensure that Griffin was indeed okay to enter. If I were Shanahan and had witnessed that hit and Griffin walking gingerly, the FIRST thing I would've done was flag down the medical staff, just to check him out quick. You could also argue that Griffin complicated things himself by being the tough guy and neglecting to get looked at, but ultimately, he's not the boss, he's not calling the shots.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-08-2013, 03:09 PM.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                            “Well, after the game we talked in detail. When he went back into the game at that time, I looked over at Dr. Andrews, he said, ‘Yeah, he’s ok to go back in.’ Of course I’m sitting there trying to evaluate Kirk Cousins’ play, so when someone says he’s OK… Well, what Dr. Andrews is talking about, when I talked to him today, he said, ‘Hey, Robert came around and he started showing us he could run; he was sprinting around and then he just took off, so I just figured he was OK. I didn’t go through a thorough examination of him until after the game.’ I wasn’t really sure in what detail he was talking about at that time. He felt Robert – just looking at him run and then take off – that he was ok to go back in. I looked at him for the next three plays, the first time he had Santana [Moss] shell across, the next time he threw a little out-round, and it looked like his footwork was good. But you could see on that last one, where he hit Pierre Garçon, that when he stepped into the pocket that it wasn’t right. At that time Pierre caught it and he was trying to kill the clock, but we were going to take him out at that time, and that’s when Kirk came in.”

                            Andrews, when reached by phone on Monday, concurred with Shanahan’s account.
                            “Coach Shanahan didn’t lie about it, and I didn’t lie,” Andrews said Monday afternoon. “I didn’t get to examine [Griffin’s knee] because he came out for one play, didn’t let us look at him and on the next play, he ran through all the players and back out onto the field. Coach Shanahan looks at me like, ‘Is he OK?’ and I give him the ‘Hi’ sign as in, ‘He’s running around, so I guess he’s OK.’ But I didn’t get to check him out until after the game. It was just a communication problem. Heat of battle. I didn’t get to tell him I didn’t get to examine the knee. Mike Shanahan would never have put him out there at risk just to win a game.”

                            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...altimore-game/

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                              First class cluster eff.

                              and Andrews looks like an idiot, IMO. I am a amazing doctor and I looked at him and gave the coach the "hi" sign.....

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: RG3 Was Never Cleared By Dr to Re-enter Wk 15 Game after knee injury

                                He actually is an amazing doctor, that's the thing. It does sound like a miscommunication between the two, likely compounded by Griffin's posturing on the sideline and avoiding the medical staff. Either way, they can't just poopoo that stuff. When someone gets hurt like that --- the coach, the player, the medical staff all need to cooperate and make sure.

                                On NFL Radio this morning, they were talking about exactly this process, needing to be looked at by the NFL, because the relationship between team physicians and the team itself is largely handled internally, and often times those physicians aren't getting paid by the team, they're paying the team. So there's conflicts of interest. They might be afraid of ruffling any feathers in the case the team decides to just terminate the relationship. It's really not a very healthy relationship in terms of actually taking care of the players, lol...

                                I wanna say it was Amani that said that team physicians should be paid by the league and assigned, to avoid conflicts of interest. And proper guidelines for examination and treatment, instead of having a situation like Griffin who basically hid his injury and avoided examination. I thought this was actually a decent idea.
                                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-08-2013, 03:18 PM.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X