I
inside info
Guest
Take this hypothetical-
The tigers singled out Libba before the game for some rough treatment to nullify his tagging tactics.
Knights saw Libba off the ball with his back to him. Thinking this an opportune time to carry out his coaches instructions, Knights ran at Libba with intentions to bowl him over. At the last second Libba looked around and saw Knights charging towards him. Libba threw his arms out to protect himself (or maybe to get the first blow in) and split Knights head open. The rest is history.
A few pertinent points-
1. A king hit suggests it was pre-meditated.
There is a good reason why there are almost no king hits these days. It is extremely stupid to think you will get away with it.
I don't think Libba or Wallace are stupid.
2. Knights said Libba wasn't in his vision. Given Libbas stature, I find it very hard to believe he could have opened Knights forhead with a hit from behind or from the side. Being hit from infront seems more feasible. Perhaps even with a protective type of arm action.
3. Libba has been investigated on in-the-clinces type of incidents. I just cannot see a 5'3 Libba king hitting someone behind the play. He's no angel but that is not in his make-up.
There is something fishy about this whole incident and the smell is comong from punt road.
My guess is Libba was provoked in some degree to hitting knights.
So good luck to you Knights, you sniveling little coward, you have come out of this smelling like roses.
The tigers singled out Libba before the game for some rough treatment to nullify his tagging tactics.
Knights saw Libba off the ball with his back to him. Thinking this an opportune time to carry out his coaches instructions, Knights ran at Libba with intentions to bowl him over. At the last second Libba looked around and saw Knights charging towards him. Libba threw his arms out to protect himself (or maybe to get the first blow in) and split Knights head open. The rest is history.
A few pertinent points-
1. A king hit suggests it was pre-meditated.
There is a good reason why there are almost no king hits these days. It is extremely stupid to think you will get away with it.
I don't think Libba or Wallace are stupid.
2. Knights said Libba wasn't in his vision. Given Libbas stature, I find it very hard to believe he could have opened Knights forhead with a hit from behind or from the side. Being hit from infront seems more feasible. Perhaps even with a protective type of arm action.
3. Libba has been investigated on in-the-clinces type of incidents. I just cannot see a 5'3 Libba king hitting someone behind the play. He's no angel but that is not in his make-up.
There is something fishy about this whole incident and the smell is comong from punt road.
My guess is Libba was provoked in some degree to hitting knights.
So good luck to you Knights, you sniveling little coward, you have come out of this smelling like roses.
