Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
Since everyone seems to be acknowledging that Heyer was looking for some revenge on that hit, I find it a little funny to see that people continue to think it was clean.
I can understand why it was flagged. It took place away from the ball and at that time guys were just kinda standing around when Heyer clocked him. A play like that is bound to draw some attention from the refs, especially if they were aware of the jawing back and forth between Portis and Dockett on previous plays, which I'm sure they were. It's just not a very smart play by Heyer, but that's just my opinion on it.
|
The fact that a particular hit is delivered with revenge in mind does not necessarily make it a dirty one. Regardless of motivation, a hit is either delivered within the confines of the rules or it is not. And, based on the exchanges on this thread, there seems to be some difference of opinion as to why the flag was thrown--was it thrown because Heyer's shot was to the head, or because it was delivered so far away from the ball? If the latter, then, as you say, it might ( and I stress "might") be flag-worthy, but it still calls for a clarification of the rules. If a play is still going on, and a hit is delivered to the front of the body of an opposing player, where is the line between "close enough to the play to be legitimate" and "too far away from the play to be legitimate"? The fact is that Heyer, an offensive lineman, threw the hit while his quarterback still had the ball behind the line of scrimmage. If it was clearly to the head, then fine, I'll accept the call. But the opinion from the Fox booth yesterday, and others on this thread, is that it was because it was simply too far away from the football. That, in my opinion, makes the call highly questionable.