New York Giants' defensive end Mathias Kiwanuka has accused Washington Redskins' left tackle Chris Samuels of a "dirty play."
While Samuels was obviously guilty of holding on the play, and a flag was thrown, the accusation of the play being an attempt to injure Kiwanuka is ridiculous. Unfortunately for Samuels, the way the story has been handled by the general "press" has propagated an inaccurate picture of the play.
For anyone that did not see the play, and for the many who would prefer to have "an axe to grind" against the Redskins (not just Giants' fans, by the way), the description of the play by AP Sports Writer Tom Canavan, a well-respected writer, paints a picture of a fairly obvious attempt to injure Kiwanuka.
The facts of the video simply do not support his description, however.
From the article:
"Replays showed that Kiwanuka beat Samuel to the outside on a pass rush and started moving toward Redskins quarterback Jason Campbell in the waning seconds of the Giants' 16-7 victory." entirely accurate
and:
"Samuels quickly turned and made a low, lunging tackle, wrapping his arms around Kiwanuka's legs. His upper torso pinned Kiwanuka's left ankle." not entirely accurate
The first thing that struck me about this portion of the article was the claim of "wrapping his arms around Kiwanuka's legs," which I didn't remember seeing. So I decided to take a closer look at the play, to see if I had simply missed it or if it actually happened that way.
As it turns out, it didn't really happen that way.
Samuels' right arm doesn't wrap around Kiwanuka's legs, not even one of his legs. In fact, even his left arm, which is the arm he used to attempt to hook Kiwanuka's waist, doesn't wrap around Kiwanuka's legs either.
The "lunging tackle" part is a bit questionable as well. Samuels was beat on the play, and was off balance and out of position, while trying to "hook" Kiwanuka around the waist with his left arm, Samuels extended his upper body outside his "center," causing him to lose his balance and fall forward.
Unfortunately for Kiwanuka, his left foot struck Samuels' left knee, as he attempted to continue his path around Samuels, causing him to fall forward, with Samuels falling on top of Kiwanuka's left foot (hard to tell if Samuels' right shoulder actually makes contact with Kiwanuka's right foot).
I decided to write this for several reasons, including the fact that I consider Chris Samuels to be a quality human being and don't think he would do what he is being accused of. But I also consider it important to present such things with as much accuracy as possible. And I don't think Tom Canavan did that.
comments (22) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
What a total crock of shit this "article" is. The only thing you got right was that the AP writer wasn't 100 percent accurate. The simple fact is that Samuels was beat so he intentionally fell on the back of Kiwanuka's legs. Thanks for posting the video -- anyone who can view that and not say that it's a dirty play is as biased and silly as you are.
Who wants to bet on the amount of the fine that will be handed down? $50,000?
2 months ago
Yeah I don't think anyone but a Skins fan can say that was not a dirty play.
2 months ago
You both are wearing Giants colored glasses if you think it is so cut and dry.
The "crock" is both of your inability to respond with ANY explanation as to what it is you see that actually supports your statement.
Give it a shot.
My bet on the fine, it will be $0.00.
from 2 months ago
Yeah i don't think he deserves a fine, but he obviously dove for his legs. Do I think he meant to hurt Kiwi? Of course not, Samuels is a good guy i believe, but he shouldnt have done that.
2 months ago
Samuels was beat on the play, but there was no intent to injure on the play. If Samuels was so dirty he wouldn't have been standing over Kiwanuka to make sure he was alright. I think it's the media blowing it out of proportion. It's also something you see all the time when a offensive lineman is beat is a hold or attempt to tackle so the qb doesn't get sacked. Samuels didn't intentionally try to hurt Kiawunuka he was just trying to protect his qb. I'm not a Giants fan or a Redskins fan. It was called a penalty for a correct reason, but Kiawunuka is trying to make something out of nothing.
from 2 months ago
Well put Steven, and I agree. My point (which was apparently missed by Vinny and "Osi") was in regards to the media inflaming the situation with inaccurate reporting of the facts, not to defend Samuels. I can understand Kiwanuka "feeling" that way, he almost got hurt, but there is NOTHING in the video that supports ANY INTENT whatsoever on Samuels' part, beyond holding the guy.
2 months ago
Forget the fact Samuels is a veteran NFL Pro Bowler with a squeaky clean reputation as context ... the assertion that he intentionally landed on Kiwanuka's ankles with intent to injure is at best a very lazy choice of words, at worst an agenda-driven spin on a completely subjective call. The more logical (and objective) conclusion is that, beaten badly on the play, Samuels wrapped Kiwanuka up to keep him from getting a clean shot at Campbell's back---exactly what offensive linemen are taught to do from Pop Warner on up---and unfortunately landed on Kiwi's ankles at exactly the wrong moment. Plays like this happen every Sunday. Unfortunately, unprofessional "reporting" of this kind of thing is also happening more and more frequently every Sunday.
Thanks for putting the piece together, Craig. Very solid.
from 2 months ago
Your welcome Mark, and thank you for adding to the debate even more intelligent points. As you can see here, this is the kind of thing that is so very easily blown out of proportion that I felt it needed to be addressed. I do wish it were receiving more attention, but alas, this article simply hasn't gotten any placement that would *raise* it beyond just another small point here at B/R.
But again, thanks for the input, very good to see.
2 months ago
I think the play can go both ways and I am a skins fan. I hoped that he would have let Kiwanuka hit Cambell and injure him for a game so we can see how Zorn reacts and what the other qb's can do. As for the play it's contreversial 1 person thinks 1 thing and another thinks something totaly diffrent
2 months ago
I think the play can go both ways and I am a skins fan. I hoped that he would have let Kiwanuka hit Cambell and injure him for a game so we can see how Zorn reacts and what the other qb's can do. As for the play it's contreversial 1 person thinks 1 thing and another thinks something totaly diffrent
2 months ago
Good article, Craig. And I agree with your comment above, there won't be any fines on this one...
2 months ago
I don't see anyone disputing what I said above: "The simple fact is that Samuels was beat so he intentionally fell on the back of Kiwanuka's legs."
Call it "wrapping up" if you want but I've seen lots of wrapping up by a busted offensive lineman and never quite like that. I don't think he intended to injure, but it was a dirty play anyway with reckless disregard.
from 2 months ago
I'll dispute your statement, in the article above I described the physical details that dispute your claim that he "intentionally fell on the back of Kiwanuka's legs".
It simply doesn't appear that way. And there won't be a fine, because there is no evidence that he did anything more than try to hold him and end up falling on Kiwanuka's legs.
Period.
from 2 months ago
I watched the clip you posted, Craig. It looks like he just fell over. It isn't hard to tell the difference between a tackle and a fall, and that was a fall.
from 2 months ago
In other words, I agree with your assessment.
from 2 months ago
Thanks Tanner, some people only see what they want to see, it is only to be expected.
2 months ago
If he just fell over, why were his hands around Kiwi's leg? Just wondering. Unless he thought being kicked in the face would help brace his fall, which is totally understandable.
from 2 months ago
He his hands weren't wrapped around Kiwanuka's legs. That is pretty plain, if you just look at it with open eyes.
If you read the article, and then watch the video, the slow motion replays in particular, watching both arms carefully, watching Kiwanuka's legs closely as well, you see the reality of the situation.
2 months ago
I've watched that video over and over and over. I dont know if it was on accedent, on purpose, or he just couldnt move in time but his arms are around Kiwi's legs.
from 2 months ago
As I have said several times, everyone will see things differently.
I only know that I see Samuels' right arm never even BEGIN to "wrap" around Kiwanuka's legs, and his left slides directly down in front of Kiwanuka, and therefore in front of Kiwanuka's leg. I haven't seen any video anywhere that shows his "around" Kiwuanuka's legs yet.
But, we all see things differently. Thanks for the input Vinny.
from 2 months ago
Oh lol I think your right. It does look as if his right arm is not around Kiwi's foot, thus tripping him. That and his upper torso falling on his ankle.
from 2 months ago
And watch Kiwanuka's left foot as he tries to continue around Samuels. Kiwanuka's left foot actually hits Samuels' left knee (which is just about on the ground already, it's close), which is actually what Kiwanuka trips over (Samuels' knee), falling forward, and then Samuels falls on top of Kiwanuka's foot.
The whole thing is just a bad play, unlucky, but very LUCKY in that noone was really hurt. Much like Brady's injury, there is an argument to be made that the circumstances were such that the player in question (Pollard or Samuels) could simply have not made the move to begin with, but the reality is that this is football, and each was only doing what EVERY OTHER PLAYER IN THE SAME SITUATION would do, and that's the way the game is played.
write a new comment