Steelers' Farrior, Chargers' Jackson mix it up
After games, the center of the football field is usually reserved for handshakes and prayers no matter how rough and tough of a game just took place.
That was not the case Sunday night after the Steelers held on to defeat the San Diego Chargers, 38-28, at Heinz Field.
As the final gun went off, Steelers linebacker James Farrior made a beeline for San Diego star receiver Vincent Jackson, who was walking off the field in the direction of the locker room.
When Jackson finally heard Farrior directing comments in his direction, he turned around and met the Steelers' linebacker near midfield.
The two continued to jaw before Farrior finally shoved his hand in Jackson's face-mask.
The two then had to be restrained by teammates and some members of each coaching staff.
Neither would elaborate about the incident afterward.
"It is just football," Farrior said. "It is a rough game. Sometimes, stuff like that happens."
When asked if something occurred during the game that sparked the confrontation, Farrior replied: "No, we just don't like each other."
Jackson refused to talk to the media afterward, but fellow receiver Chris Chambers admitted that a linebacker and a receiver getting into a tussle is quite unusual, not to mention in the middle of the field after the final whistle.
"He's a linebacker, so I didn't think he would be messing with those guys," Chambers said. "I could see if it was a DB or a safety. Vincent is an aggressive guy. I don't know what was said. Hopefully, he is alright and the other guy gets fined for whatever he did."
Jackson managed only four catches for 57 yards and didn't get into the end zone for the second consecutive week.
Farrior finished with five tackles and the game-clinching fumble recovery.
"Hopefully, we won't read too much into it and let it go and just move on," Chambers said.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.