ConElPueblo
·Players wear helmets with guards and assorted other body armour in this strange form of football, so it's the watch that'll come off 2nd best in a tackle.
Ok then, how about exposed forearms?
I agree, there’s no safety reason not to wear it. As for Nadal wearing one being ok. It’s not like tenis players don’t fall, jump, hit the ground or expose watches to g forces.
So what is making people mad? That he wore a watch?
If I’m a football player ( and I don’t like American football) and I see a 300 pound man dressed in body armor running towards me I won’t panic because he’s wearing a watch. At least I’ll know at what time I got crushed.
I don’t get all the criticism of OBJ, especially from the watch community. Safety, really? This is football, since when does the public care about a watch scratching a football player during a game?
If Tom Brady or Eli Manning did the same, it would be fashionable and a “brand ambassador”. OBJ and he’s a goofball, idiot, moron...
How about sponsors or team owners having a player injured because of it? What if it was a diamond studded RO Offshore? Of course the public doesn't care about it, but this wasn't a public demand, neither was it a claim made by the players association.
I simply cannot understand why you won't "buy" the safety argument? It is there in the rules, it is not as if they made it up on this special occasion. If they did not respond to him wearing the damn thing and someone else got hurt, where do you think the football association would stand? And while I agree that this particular item probably isn't the worst possible thing to be exposed to during a game, would you want the association to make an exception and why? A line has to be drawn somewhere.
@Yelfel - do you have any examples of this sort of discrimination happening? That would be absurd, I agree.