rajncajn Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Yep, looks like this one falls into the "I've seen worse but that looks like a penalty" category. And, the guy making the call should rightly do so not based on what play he's negating, but whether it's a call. However, had that ball fallen incomplete, the call wouldn't be nearly as scrutinized. Maybe Keg can look at the game tape and see if the flag was thrown before or after the INT? Same goes for the Gates PI call. The flag was actually pretty far upfield, if he'd thrown it before the pass was caught then at least that could negate the talk of the refs giving the game to the Saints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Well, I guess I'm seeing things. It clearly looked on the TV replay that Ingram lead with his facemask and put it into the top of Brees' chest. And I'm certainly no Charger supporter. Guys here at work saw the same thing I did. Oh well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) I think it looks enough like the crown that I can't imagine "clearly seeing" the opposite (though I can understand thinking it may have been the facemask and, perhaps it is). But it is anything but "clearly" anything. Regardless, I think with that in mind, you go back to the reality that the league is making no secrets of its intentions and that, going after a QB like that means playing with fire. You're aiming high enough tipping your head forward enough, that you can't be surprised when you get the flag. This is neither new nor a rare interpretation of the rule. It's why the NFL is erring on the side of what some think is soft. Because guys are going to push it as far as they can. And if you make the line just this side of hits that could really hurt someone, then guys are going to cross that line. If you draw it elsewhere, than that's less likely to happen. Edited October 8, 2012 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Well, we've seen flags for guys hitting QBs in the legs after being blocked into them, and flags for hitting a QB in the upper chest. I guess maybe the NFL should only allow 2 handed tag between the waist and armpits for QBs. Getting old seeing how much it is changing the outcome of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 I'm not saying they're getting it right all the time and, frankly, would prefer less calls on the field and more penalties administered after game film could be looked at. It's funny to me, actually that people bought into the "it wasn't a penalty on the field, why is it a fine?" BS because it makes way more sense to go that route. And by penalties, I mean immediate suspensions, so the team and player are both penalized. Not that they should just let everything go at the time and deal with it later but that they should only flag those completely and totally blatant and leave all these borderline ones to the film room where it's much easier to judge intent vs momentum or fluke occurrence. None the less, let's not pretend that this is like a dude being blocked into the legs of someone. This was a guy who, at full charge, not being blocked into or anything, either led with the crown of his helmet or barely didn't. A comparison that only gets made if one is prone to needless hyperbole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 None the less, let's not pretend that this is like a dude being blocked into the legs of someone. This was a guy who, at full charge, not being blocked into or anything, either led with the crown of his helmet or barely didn't. A comparison that only gets made if one is prone to needless hyperbole. No one made that comparison. You you do kick ass on strawmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 No one made that comparison. You you do kick ass on strawmen. Just to explain the difference between pretending people are making arguments that they're not and this, I'll bite. You said, "That was clearly not the crown of the helmet" I said, "Well, it either was the crown or close enough to it that it's silly to say 'clearly' and that the NFL has made it clear that they're drawing the line on the safe side of hits like that. So dude had to know he was playing with fire" Then you said, "Now they're calling dudes for getting blocked into the legs of a QB" and that we may as well go to two-hand touch. Seems like a logical extension. That, since the refs have gone too far by calling dudes for being blocked into QBs, this is just another example. Calling a guy who either hit with the crown of his helmet or barely didn't. In other words, very much comparing the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Well, I'll just say that right now I will take a win any way they can get it. I'm happy just to see them get one in the W column. But please, let's stop with the NFL/refs had the fix in for the Saints. It's one thing to say there were some bad calls, that I won't deny, but to say that the league felt bad for the Saints so they let them win is just sour grapes braindead mindless idiocy of the first magnitude. Amended Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Well, I guess I'm seeing things. It clearly looked on the TV replay that Ingram lead with his facemask and put it into the top of Brees' chest. http://imageshack.us/a/img850/7019/breemanure.png Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 http://imageshack.us...19/breemanure.png Unrelated, but surprised it survived the language filter as combining the 2 words made a bad word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 http://imageshack.us/a/img850/7019/breemanure.png Thanx! Clearly leading with head up, face and forehead! Great shot! Especially with a full run, forward lead, he would have had to been an owl to get it any higher. http://www.hairfinder.com/info/headanatomy.gif Unless the NFL has redefined human anatomy, the crown is at the very top and toward the back. This is where the term "spearing" used to come from, as in launching yourself like a spear and striking with the very top of your helmet. This used to crush the vertebrae and leave the "spearer" paralyzed (I personally played against a guy this happen to, a d-lineman who played recklessly, who crushed his neck while making a tackle ). As a coach, we teach to tackle with your head up and look at what you are hitting. Looks like great form to me. Then, to assure the victory, three flags in a row to stop any chance. One declined (but just in case) and two ticky tack, especially the one on Gates that even Collingsworth, who is not the biggest Bolt fan, was questioning it. Really? That call with under two minutes? Gates was out of bounds when the flag flew across the screen. Then a phantom holding on the next pass completed to Floyd. Three flags in a row to push it to 3rd and 37? Yeah right! Enjoy your win, "any way you can get it" , if that really makes you feel complete. Where I fault Norv, is why he kept getting fancy instead of ramming it down their throats as they had all game?!?!?! The best team on the field was the Chargers until the gift on the pick six from the refs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Thanx! Clearly leading with head up, face and forehead! Great shot! Especially with a full run, forward lead, he would have had to been an owl to get it any higher. http://www.hairfinde...headanatomy.gif Unless the NFL has redefined human anatomy, the crown is at the very top and toward the back. This is where the term "spearing" used to come from, as in launching yourself like a spear and striking with the very top of your helmet. This used to crush the vertebrae and leave the "spearer" paralyzed (I personally played against a guy this happen to, a d-lineman who played recklessly, who crushed his neck while making a tackle ). As a coach, we teach to tackle with your head up and look at what you are hitting. Looks like great form to me. Then, to assure the victory, three flags in a row to stop any chance. One declined (but just in case) and two ticky tack, especially the one on Gates that even Collingsworth, who is not the biggest Bolt fan, was questioning it. Really? That call with under two minutes? Gates was out of bounds when the flag flew across the screen. Then a phantom holding on the next pass completed to Floyd. Three flags in a row to push it to 3rd and 37? Yeah right! Enjoy your win, "any way you can get it" , if that really makes you feel complete. Where I fault Norv, is why he kept getting fancy instead of ramming it down their throats as they had all game?!?!?! The best team on the field was the Chargers until the gift on the pick six from the refs. Thanks... And it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 http://imageshack.us...19/breemanure.png That's exactly what I described... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) That's exactly what I described... If you put any part of the top of your helmet into the chin strap of an opposing player it's pretty much going to draw a flag every time, quarterback or no quarterback. Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9 © In covering the passer position, Referees will be particularly to fouls in which defenders impermissibly use the helmet and/or facemask to hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer forcibly in the head or neck area (see also the unnecessary roughness rules covering these subjects). A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in a defenseless posture - for example, (1) forcibly hitting the passers head or neck area with the helmet or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player uses his arms to tackle the passer by encircling or grasping him, or (2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/"hairline" parts of the helmet against any part of the passer's body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmetin the course of a conventional tackle on a passer. Everything I bolded seems to apply on that hit. Edited October 8, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 If you put any part of the top of your helmet into the chin strap of an opposing player it's pretty much going to draw a flag every time, quarterback or no quarterback. Everything I bolded seems to apply on that hit. That picture shows exactly the action I stated. Facemask to the upper chest. The contact of Brees' chin with the top of the helmet was a reaction of his head moving forward as a result of his chest being being struck by Ingram. I understand what you are saying - in actual play speed it looks questionable. It just bothers me. So D players can't target below the waist, and they can't target above the armpits, for fear of drawing a penalty. That doesn't leave a whole hell of a lot, especially when the D player may be simultaneously fighting off one or more 300 lb guys as strong as they are while trying to make a play. Ah well, no point in debating about it. It can't be undone - even if it did substantially change the course of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 That picture shows exactly the action I stated. Facemask to the upper chest. The contact of Brees' chin with the top of the helmet was a reaction of his head moving forward as a result of his chest being being struck by Ingram. I understand what you are saying - in actual play speed it looks questionable. It just bothers me. So D players can't target below the waist, and they can't target above the armpits, for fear of drawing a penalty. That doesn't leave a whole hell of a lot, especially when the D player may be simultaneously fighting off one or more 300 lb guys as strong as they are while trying to make a play. Ah well, no point in debating about it. It can't be undone - even if it did substantially change the course of the game. If Brees's head were actually forward, or down, from a normal position I might agree with you. But, in the picture, it's actually tilted back from a normal position. Not only that, but in the video it appears as if Ingram is driving up into Brees's chin. I know that it was very likely unintentional, but it still fits the very definition of the foul. I don't agree completely with the rule either, but like it or not, that's what we have to live with now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.