Hood's injury and the play

3rivers · Joined: 01 Jan 2011 Posts: 1695

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4E8xpOrQLM

This looks like a cheap shot from smith. Is this legal? If it is, then what ever happened to player safety? I can't believe this. NFL is getting quite pathetic these days.

I can't seem to find anything out about Hood's injury or Gilbert's, and it doesn't seem like anyone cares either.

kethnaab · Joined: 05 Jan 2009 Posts: 7307

it's legal

on run plays, the OL can chop you while you're engaged with another blocker if the OL lined up across from you or lined up next to the guy who was lined up across from you
_________________

treat88 · Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 6004

This is one of the reasons LeBeaus scheme will no longer play in today's game.

Unfortunately 100% legal, as keth noted.

And yet another reason to understand Gooddell and the owners safety mantra is a complete farce.
_________________

"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself."

at23steelers · Joined: 05 Mar 2011 Posts: 3721 Location: United States

SMashMouthMike · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 3828

That is 100% legal and perfectly illustrates(along with all the passing) why 2 gap control technique on the d line is becoming a scheme of the past. 2 gap is a great scheme. So much so, that the NFL and its lawyers had to cook the rule book in order to stifle it. Seriously, read the excerpt in the NFL rule book about Chop Blocks. It's utter BS.

That is what zone blocking schemes do - they stretch out the holes in 2 gap defenses and create double teams on d linemen. There is a way to beat it - penetration destroys it, but you got to beat your guy to a spot. Our d linemen are slow off the snap.

I can't find anything about Hood's injury. I assume he's fine because we had the press conference already right? The safety issue is about dollars, not about safety, hypocrisy at its finest. I don;t know why the players union didn't bring this rule to the table. The effectiveness of this block is the only reason the NFL lets this rule exist, when it is illegal(as far as I know) at any other level of football because it is inherently unsafe.
_________________

Thanks Lyasr 529

treat88 · Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 6004

at23steelers · Joined: 05 Mar 2011 Posts: 3721 Location: United States

SMashMouthMike · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 3828

at23steelers · Joined: 05 Mar 2011 Posts: 3721 Location: United States

JDLefebvre · Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:43 pm Post subject:

SMashMouthMike · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 3828

That block is legal, only on a backside of a run when executed by 2 olineman lined up side by side and when it occurs in the NFL.

At any other times, during a pass, in any other league, at any other level = illegal.

In context of player safety, this play is bushleague, pusillanimous and unsafe.

A 'good no call'
- I'd take issue with that characterization. Legal it is.
_________________

Thanks Lyasr 529

at23steelers · Joined: 05 Mar 2011 Posts: 3721 Location: United States

kethnaab · Joined: 05 Jan 2009 Posts: 7307

SMashMouthMike · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 3828

It's a bad rule, that is exactly what I mean.

'Good no call' implies that there was no intentional harm, no foul, no unfair advantage gained. Tell that to Ziggy. The special circumstances that were introduced into the rule book by a biased rules committee to make this play legal here, and illegal everywhere else is what I take issue with. Moreover, regardless of what the rulebook says, that play is inherently dangerous. THAT is why it illegal everywhere else. So, it's legal just because of who performed the combo block, not that this kind of block is dangerous because of its nature? Only a lawyer and biased rules committee could invent such a rule. Ill try to dig it up.

I don't have a problem with there not being a flag thrown here. I wouldn't characterize as a "good No call" because it is an agenda driven rule, dangerous, and silly in the context of the player safety drivel the league is throwing at us.
_________________

Thanks Lyasr 529

3rivers · Joined: 01 Jan 2011 Posts: 1695

hypocrisy: the nfl rules and safety. Only a spectator that disregards player safety would think otherwise after watching such a play and agreeing with nfl rules to allow such a play.

Good point about the nfl and it's lawyers finding a way to kill 2 gap schemes. Too bad they are going to seriously injure a few along the way Idea

Isn't the game dangerous enough?

What will be next? We know they don't want good run D and they want more passing. Maybe they will make the field a bit wider and make the endzones larger? Wait, that will interfere with revenues, so forget that Embarassed

Best thing to do is just ruin defenses and that they are Embarassed

What will it take for them to change this rule though? I can't believe defenders haven't petitioned against this rule, citing player safety the league claims as a reason. Even an uneducated fan with absolutely nop interest could view the play and say " why did the OL dive at the DL knee"? Announcers kept quiet on the replay as well, they never really went into details about how and why it is legal as if they are told not to speak out about certain things. Then of course, they could cbe just waiting to go for a commercial break Rolling Eyes