| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bodysuit Man 
Joined: 08 Jan 2008 Posts: 636 Location: Virginia
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Mod Edit/Removed _________________ Confucius Say: To make a long story short, don't tell it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
vikingsrule
 Joined: 15 Nov 2005 Posts: 39466 Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
And here is a WARNING for you.
This kind of derogatory language is not tolerated on the forum.
| Quote: |
Forum Rules
1. Do not post anything abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. This includes references in usernames, signatures, avatars, and PMs. |
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rpmwr19 
Joined: 23 Dec 2006 Posts: 16906 Location: Stillwater, MN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Klomp wrote: | | fishtanked wrote: | | rpmwr19 wrote: | | If they call it correctly that's a penalty; launching has nothing to do with it. |
Not the way I interpret the rule, he doesn't have time to square up to deliver the hit. |
My interpretation as well |
What part of the rule says they have to square up?
Did I miss reading that? All I read was crown of the helmet as a weapon. _________________
RPM's Vikings Roster Outlook |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kellerman 
Joined: 16 May 2010 Posts: 3164 Location: Amsterdam
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Anything that rule that gives the refs more decisions to make bothers me.
Since we're only dealing with runs in the open field, any such call is likely to be calling back a big play. What are the refs going to be looking for? If a RB dips his head and drives through a defensive player who goes high, is that going to get called? Even if he doesn't intentionally targets him with his helmet?
Putting more of the game into the fallible hands of the refs something we should get away from. Why not work with sensors? Apply sensors to the helmet-area of a player you do not want him to use. Set a minimum contact threshold, and if that helmet contacts the opposing player with enough force, buzz in the booth or the ref.
If you're going to go the hypocritical route of not making better safety equipment mandatory, and instead 'tone down' the game, at least go about it the right way. We should be using technology to take the refs out of the game more and more, and remove judgement calls. _________________
sig by Jamison
#97 Everson Griffin: 0 tackles : 0 sacks : 0 FF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fishtanked 
Joined: 15 Mar 2008 Posts: 620 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rpmwr19 wrote: | | Klomp wrote: | | fishtanked wrote: | | rpmwr19 wrote: | | If they call it correctly that's a penalty; launching has nothing to do with it. |
Not the way I interpret the rule, he doesn't have time to square up to deliver the hit. |
My interpretation as well |
What part of the rule says they have to square up?
Did I miss reading that? All I read was crown of the helmet as a weapon. |
When Jeff Fisher was explaining it on NFLN he said there were 3 parts to the motion, the player must square up, lower the head and use the crown of the helmet as a weapon. My interpretation of that is it needs to be a deliberate attempt to use the helmet as a weapon, in the AD/Gay example I don't think he had time to do anything deliberate. It was a bam/bam kind of play and AD was pretty much upright. I hope I'm right anyways, there is no way the above play should be illegal. _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rpmwr19 
Joined: 23 Dec 2006 Posts: 16906 Location: Stillwater, MN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think on a hit like that the refs would unfortunately see the force of the hit delivered, and Gay's reaction and call it a penalty. When he delivers the hit he is square to Gay and uses the crown instead of dropping the shoulder.
It was probably instinctual, but I see that refs blowing te whistle on that one.
I fully agree with Kellerman that there is too muh subjectivity in the rule and puts too much in the refs hands. _________________
RPM's Vikings Roster Outlook |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fishtanked 
Joined: 15 Mar 2008 Posts: 620 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rpmwr19 wrote: | I think on a hit like that the refs would unfortunately see the force of the hit delivered, and Gay's reaction and call it a penalty. When he delivers the hit he is square to Gay and uses the crown instead of dropping the shoulder.
It was probably instinctual, but I see that refs blowing te whistle on that one.
I fully agree with Kellerman that there is too muh subjectivity in the rule and puts too much in the refs hands. |
It's probably a play that would be called by some crews and not by others. _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kellerman 
Joined: 16 May 2010 Posts: 3164 Location: Amsterdam
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| fishtanked wrote: | | rpmwr19 wrote: | I think on a hit like that the refs would unfortunately see the force of the hit delivered, and Gay's reaction and call it a penalty. When he delivers the hit he is square to Gay and uses the crown instead of dropping the shoulder.
It was probably instinctual, but I see that refs blowing te whistle on that one.
I fully agree with Kellerman that there is too muh subjectivity in the rule and puts too much in the refs hands. |
It's probably a play that would be called by some crews and not by others. |
And there we have, in a nutshell, one of the main problems with this rule
(apart from the slide towards 'finesse', aka moving towards the pussyfication of the league) _________________
sig by Jamison
#97 Everson Griffin: 0 tackles : 0 sacks : 0 FF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
skywindO2 
Joined: 06 Jul 2006 Posts: 11271 Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
The William Gay hit is not illegal by the new rule, but would still probably be flagged because of the subjectivity of the rule. The rule still allows runners to lower their helmets in a defensive stance, which is clearly what happened here. A hit like this is incidental and not intended to be flagged.
The first hit in this video would be flagged: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O94DwdnHUpI
I can't find a video of it, but the best example in Adrian Peterson's career is actually in his rookie year in a pre-season game against the Jets, if anyone remembers that hit. That's the type of hit that this rule is targeting. _________________
2013 Adopt-a-Viking: Harrison Smith |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marshpit23 
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 691 Location: Baxter, MN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Who should be flagged on the first hit...Louis Delmas, AP, or both?? I seriously do not like the new rule; however, I am an advocate for safety. I just do not know how the refs will interpret this rule on the field at full speed. _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SteelKing728 
Joined: 23 Aug 2008 Posts: 10849 Location: Pittsburgh
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I have a bad feeling we are going to get some horrible horrible calls this year, and quite a few great runs by Adrian will be totally wiped out because the ref thought he was using the crown of his helmet as a weapon.
That's what scares me the most.
now that I think about it, this move is totally backwards and might hurt football. Why not just make better equipment instead of watering the league down?
I hope this rule doesn't stand for very long. _________________
Thanks Jamison on that avi.
2013 Adopt a Minnesota Viking - Jared Allen - DE - #69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Gnat 
 Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 34112 Location: Minneapolis
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I don't mind this rule, I think that we'll see it enforced fairly hard in preseason and maybe the first week or two, but like flopping in the NBA, this isn't something that will stay around long in terms of getting called, and refs won't call it as often once players try more actively to avoid leading with the head.
This is a needed rule change, and something that the NFL can govern to make it safer. The reason that they don't with helmets is because of legal implications if they pick one, go with it for five years and turns out there was a better one available at the beginning of part way through. Players have an option to wear what is considered safer helmet, but NFL won't mandate. _________________ Gnat's Movie Reviews
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Klomp 
Joined: 11 Aug 2011 Posts: 3381 Location: The Home of Schwan's Ice Cream
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The Gnat wrote: | | I don't mind this rule, I think that we'll see it enforced fairly hard in preseason and maybe the first week or two, but like flopping in the NBA, this isn't something that will stay around long in terms of getting called, and refs won't call it as often once players try more actively to avoid leading with the head.. |
That's what I'm thinking as well. _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kellerman 
Joined: 16 May 2010 Posts: 3164 Location: Amsterdam
|
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The Gnat wrote: | | The reason that they don't with helmets is because of legal implications if they pick one, go with it for five years and turns out there was a better one available at the beginning of part way through. Players have an option to wear what is considered safer helmet, but NFL won't mandate. |
They could get the same result by simply banning the helmets that are 'known' to be significantly less safe. Addition by subtraction. _________________
sig by Jamison
#97 Everson Griffin: 0 tackles : 0 sacks : 0 FF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|