More on Attaochu suspension

Greetings-

I was in a rush to make deadline Monday night, so I didn’t include a few bits of information on the half-game suspension of linebacker Jeremiah Attaochu in the story either that went on the blog or in the paper.

Coach Paul Johnson said he decided on a half game because the punch was so out of character and because that’s what the ACC would have handed out if he had been thrown out of the game. NCAA rules state that a player ejected for fighting (the definition covers Attaochu’s strike) in the first half of a game can play the following game. A player ejected in the second half of a game must sit out the first half of the next game.

The ACC decided not to add any further discipline. I don’t know the timing of the ACC’s decision and the school’s.

I saw a couple posts that said a full-game suspension would have been better as it would have set a precedent or set an example for his teammates. That may well be the case, but that wouldn’t be very just to Attaochu.

Sorry it’s not the normal volume for a Tuesday. A little behind. I’ll have more around 1 p.m. from the Johnson news conference, with links.

Ken Sugiura, Georgia Tech blog

68 comments Add your comment

zgoldatl

November 15th, 2011
9:48 am

Go Jackets
Go Panthers
Go Falcons

Ramblin Man

November 15th, 2011
10:10 am

Seems like a reasonable punishment given all the circumstances. Hope after such a disappointing outing the team gets things back on track takes care of Duke and then a hopefull win over the pups.
Ken,
Are you going to cover basketball? I will be at the Charleston Classic thursday night and believe it or not there are people here in Charleston that are excited to see what Gregory has to offer.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
10:20 am

Suspended for a half for a PERSONAL FOUL?

If UGA had such a tough policy, they’d need a CPA to keep track. Remember the Auburn UGA game last year?

Robert

November 15th, 2011
10:20 am

As a Tech fan, I get upset by fellow Tech fans who want to make things tougher on our players than any other schools do, not only on this incident but academically. And yet, they expect us to win all of our games.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
10:22 am

I don’t get it: if the refs didn’t eject him, why are we suspending him for the half? It’s not like the ref DIDN’T see the punch; he DID throw the flag… anyways. It’s dook. but still.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
10:24 am

I guess this shows how pissed CPJ is at Jeremiah… cause the suspension is totally unnecessary. did cost us the game though.

armie

November 15th, 2011
10:40 am

And to think, if Attaochu would have just smoked pot he would have been made team captian. Tek’s nonexistent drug policy is an outrage.

Johnson did what he had to do to show his thugs that he is still in charge of the asylum until he gets fired in another 2 years.

armie

November 15th, 2011
10:44 am

Uh oh!!! Typo!!! Oh no!!!! *captain

GIVE ME A BREAK

November 15th, 2011
10:45 am

Too big a deal is being made of a player hitting another’s helmet. It was not a body shot. It was a lame punch that would not have hurt the other player if the helmet had not been there. Helmet to helmet does not lead to a suspension and this should not have. Lesson learned move on. Tech players are not coached that way and I’m proud of them and the coaches for that. ” LET’S ROLL JACKETS “

trevinb

November 15th, 2011
11:08 am

@GTJoe UGA had two players suspended for a half after the Vandy game. One player had retaliated after being hit in the back of the knee after the whistle. Another player had a personal foul.

armie

November 15th, 2011
11:14 am

Trevinb –

Dont waste your time. Since Joe is a bug fan that means he doesn’t deal well with facts and realities.

Bobby Dodds Ghost

November 15th, 2011
11:16 am

If Johnson hadn’t suspended him the ACC would have. Glad to see PJ being proactive it was a cheap,stupid play.

Rduck

November 15th, 2011
11:20 am

GT Joe: i believe the suspension is appropriate and not just because CPJ is pissed at him. we cannot afford to have plays like that in games. we have a hard enough time stopping teams without penalties, much less with them. i think CPJ just wants to send a message to all the players that this will not be tolerated from anyone at anytime. and the penalty was big, but it wasn’t the only reason we lost the game. poor defense and defensive planning, poor execution on both DL and OL, dropped passes, weak punting again, and VT just manhandled us with their OL and huge QB. JA shouldn’t have to shoulder all the blame….

polecat

November 15th, 2011
11:33 am

Attaochu’s action was in violation of NCAA Football Rule 2-32-1-a for fighting. By NCAA Football Rule 9-5-1-b, the penalty for violation of the rule in the second half includes suspension for the first half of the team’s next scheduled game. As previously stated, the ACC would have suspended him anyway.

yeller bug

November 15th, 2011
11:48 am

UGA is riding high after their big win over AU. Hopefully, they’ll do a full team drug screen this week so a few will be suspended the following week against us.We need all the help we can get. Duke should not be a problem, but neither should have UVA and Miami. I was surprised that CAG did not blitz as much against VPI—we can’t seem to get the pressure with just 4 rushers. It’d be nice if we threw the ball 20 times this week. We need the practice as we must have all our weapons sharp for our final home game.

Actually...

November 15th, 2011
12:16 pm

…there are personal fouls and then there are P

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
12:18 pm

Suspended for a half for a PERSONAL FOUL?

Not for a personal foul but for throwing a punch.

Big Difference.

Funny thing is if he had been smoking weed he wouldn’t have been suspended at all.

Tech’s drug policy is that big of a joke.

Actually...

November 15th, 2011
12:19 pm

…OOPS – then there are PERSONAL FOULS – this particular case follows under the capital heading since it was of the “punch” caliber, which is more aggregious than, say, hitting someone late on the way out of bounds or after they are down.

Thus, not all personal fouls warrant suspension, or, as others have suggested, not only would UGA have a substantial number of suspensions, but so would just about every other college team…

U(sic)GAly

November 15th, 2011
12:30 pm

Are you U(sic)GA trolls banned from the Georgia boards? Is that why you spend all your time on Tech boards? No one takes what you say seriously over here. Just go away and annoy someone who cares what you have to say.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
12:41 pm

Are you U(sic)GA trolls banned from the Georgia boards?

No

Is that why you spend all your time on Tech boards?

No

No one takes what you say seriously over here.

Dont Care

Just go away and annoy someone who cares what you have to say.

No

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
12:46 pm

Mutts can’t read, apparently. If he broke the fighting rule, the ACC would suspend him for a half. They did not, so they apparently don’t think he was fighting.

If he was ejected, he would be suspended for a half by the ACCt. He was not ejected, thus the ACC did not suspend him.

Any mutts that were suspended for a half last year were probably suspended by the SEC, not Richt. Big difference.

GT Joe Joe

November 15th, 2011
12:48 pm

Mutts can’t read, apparently. If he broke the fighting rule, the ACC would suspend him for a half. They did not, so they apparently don’t think he was fighting.

If he was ejected, he would be suspended for a half by the ACCt. He was not ejected, thus the ACC did not suspend him.

Any mutts that were suspended for a half last year were probably suspended by the SEC, not Richt. Big difference.

GT Joe Joe

November 15th, 2011
12:52 pm

Wow actually…different levels of personal fouls? If the conference didn’t suspend him, and the refs didn’t eject him, then this is just a normal personal foul. CPJ did something richt would never do: suspend a kid he doesn’t have to suspend.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
12:58 pm

Wow actually…different levels of personal fouls? If the conference didn’t suspend him

The conference didn’t suspend him BECAUSE CPJ ALREADY HAD.

Same as with the Georgia players. Richt suspended them first so the SEC didn’t have to.

Basically the conference will step in and suspend a player if the coach isn’t doing his job.

Both CPJ and Richt in this case did theirs.

Now if the Tech player had been using Drugs he would not have been suspended.

At UGA he would have.

armie

November 15th, 2011
1:00 pm

Joe,

It didnt come from the ACC since Johnson went ahead a suspended him. A single gutless, cowardly, thuggish hit to a players head doesnt necessarily constitute “fighting.” Johnsin did the right thing by putting a collar on his dog.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:02 pm

armie and Headly: apparently mutts can’t read:

“The ACC decided not to add any further discipline. I don’t know the timing of the ACC’s decision and the school’s.”

Now unless you have some inside info, STFU.

armie

November 15th, 2011
1:02 pm

Tech has proudly played FBI busted drug Lords too

Supersize that order, mutt

November 15th, 2011
1:05 pm

LOL @ GT Joe @ 1:02

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:08 pm

armie: obsess much with GT football? slow arrest day in Athens?

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:19 pm

“Georgia defensive players Kwame Geathers and Shawn Williams must sit out the first half of the Bulldogs’ next game Oct. 29 against Florida under a suspension handed out today by the Southeastern Conference for their actions during the Vanderbilt game last Saturday.”

Richt is gutless.

GIVE ME A BREAK

November 15th, 2011
1:20 pm

Hitting a player out of bounds can cause injury, helmet to helmet can cause injury, a body shot can cause injury, a fist to the helmet is dumb but not likely to cause injury other than possibly to the players fist.

Trevinb

November 15th, 2011
1:20 pm

I normally don’t read Tech articles but I was curious on the suspension since the same thing happened to UGA players after the Vandy game earlier this season. It sounds like the SEC has more stringent rules than the ACC. Players in the SEC can be suspended without an ejection. In the case of the UGA-Vandy game, the league reviewed since players from both teams were involved. The player from Vandy that took the cheap shot that led to the retaliation was also suspended for a half. He was flagged for a personal foul during the game but was not ejected. It is the same situation as the Tech player. A player does not have to be ejected to be suspended. If they fight or get hit with a flagrant foul, a suspension is pretty much automatic in the SEC. I guess the ACC does not have as tough a policy.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:33 pm

Trevinb: ACC and SEC abide by the same NCAA rules.

Fighting is an automatic 1/2 game suspension in the ACC and SEC, because it’s an NCAA rule. This is why Geathers was suspended. As for Williams, he also broke an NCAA rule:

Williams’ suspension was for a flagrant personal foul with 2:08 left in the third quarter. That violated NCAA Rule 9-1-4: “No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder.”

Trevinb

November 15th, 2011
1:40 pm

So it doesn’t matter what PJ did. The Tech player was going to be suspended by the ACC because he broke the same rules.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:44 pm

what rule did he break that warrants a suspension?

He wasn’t fighting, there was no fight. Geathers punched a guy in RETALIATION for a previous play. that’s fighting. The QB wasn’t a defenseless player, either, so 9-1-4 doesn’t apply.

GTJason

November 15th, 2011
1:44 pm

What is this garbage about drug policy? We have suspended players for a season because of drug use. And we sure haven’t covered it up until after a big game so our head coach could keep his job and let the players serve their suspension for a lesser opponent (new mexico state.) Can’t wait for CPJ to be 2-1 against you mutts

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:48 pm

GT WOULD have a tough drug policy if we had a bunch of thugs on our team getting arrested all the time. Don’t forget, Richt put in the tough policies because UGA was getting 10-15 arrests EVERY offseason. He was REACTING to a problem, not being proactive.

GIVE ME A BREAK

November 15th, 2011
1:52 pm

It looked like Tech’s defense was too focused on stripping the ball rather than tackling the players around the legs. A 6′6 QB needs his legs knocked out from under him.

TampaDawg

November 15th, 2011
1:54 pm

yeller bug

November 15th, 2011
11:48 am

UGA is riding high after their big win over AU. Hopefully, they’ll do a full team drug screen this week so a few will be suspended the following week against us.
——————————
Difference is if both teams did full drug screens, the tech players that do fail will still be on the field against UGA.

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
1:57 pm

Right Tampa, because we don’t have drug/arrest problems like UGA over the past 5-6 years under Richt.

Remember, his tough policies are the direct result of him trying to save face (and job) by cracking down on all the offseason arrests.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
2:15 pm

Now unless you have some inside info, STFU.

No. They decided not to add FURTHER discipline. Meaning they would have if CPJ didnt.

Same as in the UGA case.

DawginLex

November 15th, 2011
2:15 pm

I’m glad to see this idiot GT Joe give equal TROLL time to both UGA and GT boards.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
2:18 pm

What is this garbage about drug policy?

Tech doesn’t suspend players for the first failed test. UGA does.

It takes 4 failed tests to be dismissed from the Tech football team. At UGA three and you’re out.

UGA DRUG POLICY IS MUCH TOUGHER THAN TECH’s

Can’t wait for CPJ to be 2-1 against you mutts

You better do the math on that one again. He is about to be 1-3 as he is already 1-2

Ken Sugiura

November 15th, 2011
2:19 pm

Ramblin Man – I’ll be picking up basketball once football ends.
GT Joe – What Attaochu did fell under the rulebook’s definition of fighting.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
2:20 pm

Remember, his tough policies are the direct result of him trying to save face (and job) by cracking down on all the offseason arrests.

No they aren’t. You have it backwards. The tough policies are the reason behind all the arrests and suspensions.

At other schools most of the stuff you hear about at UGA is conveniently swept under the rug ala Matt Skole.

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
2:21 pm

GT Joe – What Attaochu did fell under the rulebook’s definition of fighting.

Owned

headley lamar

November 15th, 2011
2:22 pm

GT WOULD have a tough drug policy if we had a bunch of thugs on our team getting arrested all the time.

Sort of like Reuben Houston.

trevinb

November 15th, 2011
2:24 pm

I guess logic only works for some people. According to the article above, the ACC was looking at it because they decided not add more to the suspension. I’m not sure why Joe’s pannies are in such a wad. Throwing a punch is fighting. The VT player was also defenseless. If throwing a punch at a player, defenseless or otherwise, doesn’t warrant a suspension, then nothing does. Your coach did the right and admirable thing. Bottomline, your player won’t be missed against Duke, and he probably has learned his lesson. Cool heads will be needed in a few weeks.

armie

November 15th, 2011
2:26 pm

Joe,

Do you also go by the alias of supertroll by any chance?

GT Joe

November 15th, 2011
2:40 pm

Ken, I’ll have to respectfully disagree.

If the ref thought he was fighting, he would have been ejected immediately per NCAA rule 9-5. This did not happen.

Now if you are saying that the ACC determined he was fighting AFTER THE GAME, that is a totally different story altogether. I see nothing in your articles to that effect.

headley: the tough policies are the reason for all the arrests? LOL, Richt controls the Athens PD now?