Understanding Hard-Hitting Rules

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm just asking you a question. Does it bother you when you see a ticky tack call that could potentially have impact on a game?

Nobody likes a bad call period... but at the same time I think we just have to accept this is the route the league is going and it's not going to change. It's not perfect, but letting guys get blown up the old way wasn't right either.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

im pretty sure you can hit a running back or any established runner helmet to helmet.

the helmet to helmet rules apply to defenseless players only i think (players with ball who havent established themselves as runners)

as to qbs you cant hit them at the knees or below if you have an unobstructed path (seems real vague to me), you cant touch their head/helmet with any part of your body and im still trying to figure out if you cant lead with your helmet anywhere on a qb.

ps - the rules for defenders is almost impossible for them to comply with all the time, the game is just too fast, players move/lower their head at the last second before impact changing where the defender's intended point of impact . . . its just become impossible really.

I agree...and if you have a rule that is impossible to comply with in any situation then your rule is crap. To me it simply is not fair to ask the defense to allow for something to happen that they are specifically on the field to prevent. Allowing a "defenseless" WR to catch a ball and establish himself is telling the defense "don't do your job" of defending the field. And it is also rife with other concerns that others have pointed out. Quite frankly I see the benefits of said rule being somewhat bogus too.

The rule should be no direct and primary contact to the helmet of any kind, for any player on the field at any time. ie: you directly hit a guy in the helmet with your shoulder (or any body part)...penalty. you hit a guy in the shoulder with your shoulder (or any body part) and your helmets bump...clean. And the caveat is that the offensive player can make no motion to put their helmet in harms way. ie: if they duct their head into direct h2h contact then it's clean.

Honestly if they don't want to get hurt being in "defenseless" position...they just shouldn't get into defenseless position. Why is that notion not ever discussed? Everyone talks constantly about how it is the defenders responsibility to be less reckless...but shouldn't the offensive player be at least as responsible?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Nobody likes a bad call period... but at the same time I think we just have to accept this is the route the league is going and it's not going to change. It's not perfect, but letting guys get blown up the old way wasn't right either.

Why? We can't be bothered by it? I mean I am way over representing my concerns with it since I don't really care as much (specifically about this hit and this issue) as my frequent posting in this thread would indicate. I am more concerned about the trend here and where this is all going.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Why? We can't be bothered by it? I mean I am way over representing my concerns with it since I don't really care as much (specifically about this hit and this issue) as my frequent posting in this thread would indicate. I am more concerned about the trend here and where this is all going.

I think you can accept it while still not liking it. At least that's where I'm at.

I'm kinda with you, I really don't care a ton about this either overall.

Where is this thing trending to in your opinion? They changed the kickoff rule, but has that really had a big impact so far?

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

And the caveat is that the offensive player can make no motion to put their helmet in harms way. ie: if they duct their head into direct h2h contact then it's clean.

i could see that being a consideration by the league as to any fine or what amount. its real tough when a receiver drops his head at the last second but at game speed, if its H2H on a defenseless receiver, its going to be called.

like it has been said, its just the way the game is going and we have to accept it.

now the one penalty i do have a problem with is when they call the 15 yard personal foul on ever so slight contact to a qbs helmet. the qb releases the ball as a defender puts his hands up to try and deflect the ball, his hands ever so slightly graces the qbs helment . .flag, 15 yards . .the refs should have discretion to only call that when there is solid contact imo.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I agree...and if you have a rule that is impossible to comply with in any situation then your rule is crap. To me it simply is not fair to ask the defense to allow for something to happen that they are specifically on the field to prevent. Allowing a "defenseless" WR to catch a ball and establish himself is telling the defense "don't do your job" of defending the field. And it is also rife with other concerns that others have pointed out. Quite frankly I see the benefits of said rule being somewhat bogus too.

The rule should be no direct and primary contact to the helmet of any kind, for any player on the field at any time. ie: you directly hit a guy in the helmet with your shoulder (or any body part)...penalty. you hit a guy in the shoulder with your shoulder (or any body part) and your helmets bump...clean. And the caveat is that the offensive player can make no motion to put their helmet in harms way. ie: if they duct their head into direct h2h contact then it's clean.

Honestly if they don't want to get hurt being in "defenseless" position...they just shouldn't get into defenseless position. Why is that notion not ever discussed? Everyone talks constantly about how it is the defenders responsibility to be less reckless...but shouldn't the offensive player be at least as responsible?

I totally hear you, but the league wants offense & scoring. They rarely make any rule changes to benefit the defense.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i could see that being a consideration by the league as to any fine or what amount. its real tough when a receiver drops his head at the last second but at game speed, if its H2H on a defenseless receiver, its going to be called.

like it has been said, its just the way the game is going and we have to accept it.

now the one penalty i do have a problem with is when they call the 15 yard personal foul on ever so slight contact to a qbs helmet. the qb releases the ball as a defender puts his hands up to try and deflect the ball, his hands ever so slightly graces the qbs helment . .flag, 15 yards . .the refs should have discretion to only call that when there is solid contact imo.

Pretty sure they did change that this year. No more automatic 15 yard penalties for contact to the head. Incidental contact is ok.

[mlmpetert]

I agree this particular rule is ruining the integrity of the game and not because i like big hits but because it’s a completely impractical and unavoidable rule. I think FPRLG said it best:

The league should be looking at how to eliminate the cause not the symptom.

Under the definition of the rule (at least the part we have been able to see) Robinson should have waited for Maclin to establish himself as a runner AND be in a position to defend himself. So basically Robinson would have to had stoped and waited until Maclin was running away from him before he could make the tackle. Robinson cant do that because he would lose his job.

I think the only way to fix it would be to make zone illegal – so Robinson is never in that position to begin with. Or make it a penalty on the QB to lead the WR into a defenseless position - so Robinson would know to let up because Philly just got flagged.

If you make it a penalty for a QB to put a receiver in a defenseless position Matty said the QB may take additional hits or sacks. I don’t really buy that. QBs make a ton of reads and are paid more than other players to do so. Also many WR routes change based off a read on the defense (especially in a west coast offense), so if a receiver and QB detect zone they just change a route to avoid the penalty. This would eliminate the vast majority of defenseless receiver hits and serve to eliminate the cause not the symptom.

Something needs to be done so the offensive player has responsibility to avoid these situations. Even if only for safety reasons and not competitive reasons.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I agree this particular rule is ruining the integrity of the game and not because i like big hits but because it’s a completely impractical and unavoidable rule. I think FPRLG said it best:



Under the definition of the rule (at least the part we have been able to see) Robinson should have waited for Maclin to establish himself as a runner AND be in a position to defend himself. So basically Robinson would have to had stoped and waited until Maclin was running away from him before he could make the tackle. Robinson cant do that because he would lose his job.

I think the only way to fix it would be to make zone illegal – so Robinson is never in that position to begin with. Or make it a penalty on the QB to lead the WR into a defenseless position - so Robinson would know to let up because Philly just got flagged.

If you make it a penalty for a QB to put a receiver in a defenseless position Matty said the QB may take additional hits or sacks. I don’t really buy that. QBs make a ton of reads and are paid more than other players to do so. Also many WR routes change based off a read on the defense (especially in a west coast offense), so if a receiver and QB detect zone they just change a route to avoid the penalty. This would eliminate the vast majority of defenseless receiver hits and serve to eliminate the cause not the symptom.

Something needs to be done so the offensive player has responsibility to avoid these situations.

You would basically be taking away any passes over the middle. I just don't see that as a practical solution. The NFL isn't going to put in a rule like that as the end result would hamper offenses.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I agree this particular rule is ruining the integrity of the game and not because i like big hits but because it’s a completely impractical and unavoidable rule. I think FPRLG said it best:



Under the definition of the rule (at least the part we have been able to see) Robinson should have waited for Maclin to establish himself as a runner AND be in a position to defend himself. So basically Robinson would have to had stoped and waited until Maclin was running away from him before he could make the tackle. Robinson cant do that because he would lose his job.

I think the only way to fix it would be to make zone illegal – so Robinson is never in that position to begin with. Or make it a penalty on the QB to lead the WR into a defenseless position - so Robinson would know to let up because Philly just got flagged.

If you make it a penalty for a QB to put a receiver in a defenseless position Matty said the QB may take additional hits or sacks. I don’t really buy that. QBs make a ton of reads and are paid more than other players to do so. Also many WR routes change based off a read on the defense (especially in a west coast offense), so if a receiver and QB detect zone they just change a route to avoid the penalty. This would eliminate the vast majority of defenseless receiver hits and serve to eliminate the cause not the symptom.

Something needs to be done so the offensive player has responsibility to avoid these situations. Even if only for safety reasons and not competitive reasons.

so basically your saying that fining guys for hits where they clearly lower their head is ruining the integrity of the game. and the solution would be to make plays across the middle non existant? to me it sounds like your solution would cause way more harm to the integrity of the game than a fine every so often.

do i like the new rules and do i like seeing flags thrown and 15 yards walked off because of a clean hit that got mis-called? no. at the same time do i like hearing about ex nfl players that are dying in their 50's and losing functions in theirs brain years after the retire? no.

the way i see it the nfl is trying to clean up the game and make it safier without ruining what made us all fall in love with the game. i feel that these first few years of the new rules will suck and be hard to deal with, and some games might be lost because of them. but in the long run hopefully players will live a healthy life after they finish playing and the nfl will be able to control the mayhem that happend on the field on a more consistant basis. this isn't the first time hitting rules have changed in the nfl, eventually players adapt to the rule.

[44ever]

I think a good idea would be to keep everything the way it is except add a upstairs review to bad calls. Get so many a game just like instant replay. Sorta instant replay on the refs.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

You would basically be taking away any passes over the middle. I just don't see that as a practical solution. The NFL isn't going to put in a rule like that as the end result would hamper offenses.

It would cut down on passes over the middle, but only on over the middle passes where the receiver continues to the outside (the hit was made around where the 40 was painted). And if you watch the video Maclin was open well before running into the CB zone. But I do agree with you in that it could dramatically cut down on offense, which the NFL prizes over anything, potentially even player safety.

The funny thing is that the only thing to deter coaches from putting their WR’s in these defenseless positions is that there was a good chance the wide out would get jacked up and fumble the ball. Now a coach can say if he gets jacked up and fumbles it doesn’t matter cause we just got a additional 15 yards. If anything I would say we are going to see more of these kind of hits as coaches exploit the defenseless receiver rule…..

[skinsfan69]

The crappy calls aren't just with the wr's. The refs are throwing personal fouls if a defender is falling into a Qb's knee. As if a defender can stop his momentum while being pushed by an olinemen. I guess it's the Carson Palmer Tom Brady rule. It's like if a popular QB gets hurt the NFL has to make up a rule to try and justify it.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

It would cut down on passes over the middle, but only on over the middle passes where the receiver continues to the outside (the hit was made around where the 40 was painted). And if you watch the video Maclin was open well before running into the CB zone. But I do agree with you in that it could dramatically cut down on offense, which the NFL prizes over anything, potentially even player safety.

The funny thing is that the only thing to deter coaches from putting their WR’s in these defenseless positions is that there was a good chance the wide out would get jacked up and fumble the ball. Now a coach can say if he gets jacked up and fumbles it doesn’t matter cause we just got a additional 15 yards. If anything I would say we are going to see more of these kind of hits as coaches exploit the defenseless receiver rule…..

Big hits only happen on passes where the WR continues to the outside?

What about big hits on a slant or quick in route where you have LB's lurking?

Look, nobody wants to get guys hurt for 15 more yards. Some of these big hits are inevitable. But I don't think you can say coaches are going to try to exploit this and get their guys killed in the process.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

so basically your saying that fining guys for hits where they clearly lower their head is ruining the integrity of the game. and the solution would be to make plays across the middle non existant? to me it sounds like your solution would cause way more harm to the integrity of the game than a fine every so often.

do i like the new rules and do i like seeing flags thrown and 15 yards walked off because of a clean hit that got mis-called? no. at the same time do i like hearing about ex nfl players that are dying in their 50's and losing functions in theirs brain years after the retire? no.

the way i see it the nfl is trying to clean up the game and make it safier without ruining what made us all fall in love with the game. i feel that these first few years of the new rules will suck and be hard to deal with, and some games might be lost because of them. but in the long run hopefully players will live a healthy life after they finish playing and the nfl will be able to control the mayhem that happend on the field on a more consistant basis. this isn't the first time hitting rules have changed in the nfl, eventually players adapt to the rule.

No im not saying that at all and thats what a lot of people seeing this thread are missing. The rule Robinson was fined under:

It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are…(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner.

He was fined over hitting a defenseless receiver. Robinson lowered his head and avoided a helmet to helmet hit. The slight helmet to facemask contact was incidental and not part of the fine or penalty. Robinson’s shoulder hit Maclin’s ball carrying arm and shoulder. That was the only contact. Maclin was sprinting across the field towards Robinson. Robinson position himself and stepped into the contact.

Im against helmet to helmet hits or lowering your helmet to hit someone with it. But that didn’t happen. I don’t like seeing players messed up later on in life either, although like boxing or mma there is a inherent risk in the sport that every player is aware of.

I dont know what the answer is but i think eliminating the cause not the symptom should be how its fixed.