Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 103

Thread: ESPN Suspends Stephen A. Smith

  1. #1
    Hall of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    6,917

    ESPN Suspends Stephen A. Smith

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...213719386.html

    Didn't see this posted.....


    ESPN suspends Stephen A. Smith over Ray Rice domestic abuse commentary
    Ben Rohrbach By Ben Rohrbach
    5 hours ago
    Shutdown Corner



    ESPN has suspended Stephen A. Smith from its TV and radio airwaves for a week following his controversial comments about Baltimore running back Ray Rice's wife, according to Sports Illustrated.


    The NFL's two-game suspension of Rice was already a hotly debated topic and Smith threw gasoline on the fire, suggesting on "First Take" that Rice's then-fiancée Janay Palmer could have done something to prevent last year's alleged domestic violence incident in an Atlantic City elevator.

    "What I’ve tried to employ the female members of my family — some of who you all met and talked to and what have you — is that ... let’s make sure we don’t do anything to provoke wrong actions, because if I come — or somebody else come, whether it’s law enforcement officials, your brother or the fellas that you know — if we come after somebody has put their hands on you, it doesn’t negate the fact that they already put their hands on you."
    Most notably, Smith's ESPN colleague Michelle Beadle drew attention to Smith's insensitive commentary.

    Fuggem.....

  2. #2
    Eventually being an idiot catches up with every idiot.

  3. #3
    I am a college graduate.

    I read the quote. I have no clue what this guy said, or what he meant to say or what he was trying to say.

    Can someone translate his quote into ENGLISH. I can't be appalled at a quote that I don't understand....

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,255
    For a week. Big whoop. Tough spot for ESPN, Stephen A is a huge personality for that network, but they have to make a statement. He sucks but the network can't afford to let him go over a statement. It's his job to talk, he clearly didn't mean it the way it came out and it's good they will let him back. Try talking all day for your job and not let a stupid line slip if you're on the network all day.

  5. #5
    Stephen A is at the top of a long list of idiots at that network. ESPN outside of live sporting events is unwatchable.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by TJ View Post
    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...213719386.html

    Didn't see this posted.....



    — if we come after somebody has put their hands on you, it doesn’t negate the fact that they already put their hands on you."


    .
    WTF does this mean?

  7. #7
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,600
    Yes!!!

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Not Scout
    Posts
    14,807
    I can't tell WTF he's trying to say either...

    Maybe something that translates to: If you see the angry black man coming, best get out of the way?

  9. #9
    Hall of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    6,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Baddniss View Post
    WTF does this mean?
    LOL. Are you ever doing the "Predict the Score" Thread again?

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Baddniss View Post
    WTF does this mean?
    Although not clearly expressed, his point is valid. The part that you quoted was just a part of a longer statement but in essence Stephen A. was saying that if his sister was hit by a man, he and "his boys" would find that man and bring justice to the situation BUT the deed was already done, the hitter getting his ass beat doesn't negate the fact that the sister was already hit. His larger statement was that everyone knows that a man hitting a woman is wrong, but no one ever speaks up to say that women have no right to hit men in the first place.

    In certain cases, women escalate arguments from being purely verbal and turn them physical by hitting the already angry man. Stephen A. was suggesting that we should instead teach women to walk away from the argument as opposed to just accepting the fact that they have the right to escalate arguments under the false pretense that a man will NEVER hit a woman.

    This is not talking about women in abusive relationships but rather a couple who is in the midst of a heated argument (usually fueled by alcohol).

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    36,218
    He's going to SiriusXM, joining Mad Dog Radio.

    ESPN wants him off the air for reasons unrelated to the Rice incident.

    SAR I

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Jersey
    Posts
    3,823
    LOL @ all the "I don't know what the hell he said" responses.

    He basically said if you got hit, you probably did something to deserve it. And even if someone seeks and gets retribution for you, it doesn't really matter because you still got hit.

    What an ass.
    Last edited by JetBidi; 07-30-2014 at 12:32 AM.

  13. #13
    His statement, put plainly, was that:

    1. Women shouldn't antagonize an abusive man;

    2. Beating up women is wrong;

    3. But when a woman is beat up the wrongness of the abuse can't be undone, which is why women shouldn't antagonize an abusive man.

    To put it even more plainly: she shares in the blame for the abuse.

  14. #14
    Practice Squad
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Macon, Georgia
    Posts
    336
    I don't believe in hitting women. PERIOD. In today's politically correct world you just can't say anything you want. A savvy media person should know the areas to stay away from. I have known women and have a couple in my family that are very aggressive and take things too far sometimes. To suggest that there aren't women like this is just ignoring the truth. That doesn't mean you have the right to just go in on a woman and knock her out. It's just the truth that there are women who would swing on you if angry and some know just how to hurt you verbally when you're already angry. I had a male relative that I was trying to help out with his wife and I told him that she was hurt and would say things to tick you off, but he didn't listen and went overboard when she said just the right things to him. I think SAS was trying to express this sentiment. It's not about a woman deserving to get hit. It's about the truth that some women escalate things physically or verbally in arguments and some men fall for it and make the mistake of putting hands on them. Men need to learn to walk away if they feel things are getting too heated. SAS just took a very macho tack on the scenario, blaming the woman in that situation. He should've known that would get him sanctioned.

  15. #15
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by SAR I View Post
    He's going to SiriusXM, joining Mad Dog Radio.

    ESPN wants him off the air for reasons unrelated to the Rice incident.
    Such as?

    You couldn't pay me to listen those two.....

  16. #16
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,665
    I'm not a fan of his at all, and I think ESPN would be a lot better without him or Skip Bayless. That being said, it's extremely difficult to parse the quote and figure out what he meant. He shouldn't have been suspended.

  17. #17
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    966
    Quote Originally Posted by JetFreak89 View Post
    Although not clearly expressed, his point is valid. The part that you quoted was just a part of a longer statement but in essence Stephen A. was saying that if his sister was hit by a man, he and "his boys" would find that man and bring justice to the situation BUT the deed was already done, the hitter getting his ass beat doesn't negate the fact that the sister was already hit. His larger statement was that everyone knows that a man hitting a woman is wrong, but no one ever speaks up to say that women have no right to hit men in the first place.

    In certain cases, women escalate arguments from being purely verbal and turn them physical by hitting the already angry man. Stephen A. was suggesting that we should instead teach women to walk away from the argument as opposed to just accepting the fact that they have the right to escalate arguments under the false pretense that a man will NEVER hit a woman.

    This is not talking about women in abusive relationships but rather a couple who is in the midst of a heated argument (usually fueled by alcohol).
    You are the only one that sees the forest thru the trees on this. It's actually a form of bullying and while that sounds ridiculous, it's accurate. The bigger picture (not that a man struck a woman) is that women, across the board, are unable to de-escalate. And I believe the theories that this is due to upbringing but I also think that the extreme equality push has an effect as well.
    Boys are taught to solve problems, usually through force which in turn, teaches one to later walk away from escalating situations. Girls are not. Girls are not allowed to be hit. But girls are taught that they are equal and we're seeing this almost glorified to a point in movies and culturally, through advertisements depicting more masculine femininity (girls with abs, shoulders, biceps not to mention shrinking haircuts depicting man-like features). Hollywood depicts women beating men up and getting hit by men as well. I still can't watch a lot of these violent-themed movies because I can't get past that. But girls don't solve problems at an early age. When they get older, they find it acceptable to hit without retribution. And why wouldn't they?

    I'm only speculating as to how and why this is going on but Smith brings up a valid issue that the general public won't comment on and it's a rapidly growing problem. And the simple solution that a man just needs to be bigger is not getting to the matter. Men, in escalating numbers are being verbally and physically intimidated until they become a submissive, sad excuse for a person. And when they are continually pushed, they can strike back with force they can't even control. And they feel shameful and confused afterwards but unable to de-escalate. Instinctively, when someone is throwing punches or trying to scratch your eyes, a man strikes back. The man may try to scare a woman before hitting but if that woman doesn't back down from threats, yelling, or even fake-attempts to hit, the eventual punch will be next. I've read about this typical escalation. Years ago, I volunteered at a women's shelter and have friends who still work there today and this is the scenario they speak of. Women are not backing down. They want to be men without retribution, and that's a problem.
    I'm not justifying one side is right or wrong as abuse goes both ways but I'm simply pointing out the trends from this topic. It's something they psychiatric field is coming to terms with how to best approach this with first determining the root causes some of which I discuss here.
    Last edited by Drunk Old Joe; 07-30-2014 at 01:36 AM.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Not Scout
    Posts
    14,807
    People need to stop calling this shlt "abuse" this isn't a battered wife or something from all sounds of it.

    The Woman Power movement nowadays want to neuter the men and have women be abusive disguting Thundercvnts.

    Many already talk so much shlt that any guy would have the shlt kicked out of him 10x over, but then they think they can haul off and hit a brotha too.

    After talking all that BS, they wanna throw a hook and think they can't be touched in return, or they WILL plan on having you arrested too.
    There's a lot of psycho whoowehs out there like that, and TBH, they deserve to get hit back.
    Hell, half the time they are hoping for that anyways so they can then contract a man/men to then beat the dog shlt out of the man anyways after the fact.

    Honestly, the best and most hilarious thing to do is to restrain and then shake the SHlT out them. And maybe get pics of them they don't like and post them online.
    These kinds are the most vain scummy broads and are absolute hypocrites.
    Shake the shlt outta them and tell her she's getting wrinkles, or boobs not as perky anymore, or cellulite on the butt/thigh area and should work on it.
    That will make them go crazier than any return punch.

    ***This should only be used if totally necessary, against sociopath abusive women, or habitually attacking feminazis****

  19. #19
    I don't believe in hitting women, but if she swings and connects first, then all bets are off.


  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hawthorne NJ
    Posts
    8,514
    Quote Originally Posted by Baddniss View Post
    WTF does this mean?
    He's saying that women should try not to provoke men, because even though it's wrong, and the guy will be punished, you still were already hit, and you could be dead by the time help arrives.
    In other words, no one can unhit you. So even though it's wrong, you're still dead.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us