Author Topic: Defenseless player  (Read 32493 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline prab

  • *
  • Posts: 669
  • FAN REACTION: +37/-47
  • Wherever you go, there you are!
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #50 on: October 22, 2014, 02:32:43 PM »
Our crew had one targeting foul during our entire regular season, 9 games.  Our playoffs start this Friday, 10/24.

We had one play, in a pre-season scrimmage, where a receiver went to his knees to attempt to catch a low pass and got drilled in the back while still on his knees.  Although the receiver met the definition of "defenseless player", I agree with AB that this type of scenario constitutes a PF either live or dead ball variety, depending on the timing of the hit, and would also have been a foul last year.

I believe that the NFHS was thinking more of liability issues (we told them not to allow defenseless players to get drilled) than in trying to clarify a type of foul.

Offline SCHSref

  • *
  • Posts: 413
  • FAN REACTION: +15/-10
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #51 on: October 22, 2014, 08:08:55 PM »
I hope no one has had a "defenseless player" call all year, because there is no such foul!

9-4-3i3
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.  15 yd penalty.

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but it seems like a separate infraction, just not a separate signal.  I'm sure ralph can shed some light on this

If you didn't see it, you can't call it

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #52 on: October 22, 2014, 08:13:31 PM »
9-4-3i3
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.  15 yd penalty.

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but it seems like a separate infraction, just not a separate signal.  I'm sure ralph can shed some light on this
Illegal helmet contact is a foul against ANYONE, defenseless or not.  The fact that they are defenseless is meaningless.  And it's still a 15 yard penalty.  There is nothing special that the hittee is defenseless.

Offline SCHSref

  • *
  • Posts: 413
  • FAN REACTION: +15/-10
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #53 on: October 23, 2014, 05:10:48 AM »
Illegal helmet contact is a foul against ANYONE, defenseless or not.  The fact that they are defenseless is meaningless.  And it's still a 15 yard penalty.  There is nothing special that the hittee is defenseless.

I'm not arguing that.  What I am saying is that they added the definition of defenseless player and placed the previously mentioned definition which lends itself to an explanation of whether or not a player was defenseless.  Of course, it its a judgement call on if you believe he was or was not, but it still seems like a separate explanation or reason to throw a flag. 
If you didn't see it, you can't call it

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #54 on: October 23, 2014, 06:56:46 AM »
but it still seems like a separate explanation or reason to throw a flag.
It's a superfluous word in that penalty.

What's the difference between:

3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.  15 yd penalty.

and

3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against an opponent.  15 yd penalty.

In fact, the first one could be misleading.  It implies that helmet-to-helmet contact against an opponent that is not defenseless is not a foul.

"Defenseless" was a waste of the Committee's time, when they could have been fixing real rule problems.

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 3491
  • FAN REACTION: +133/-24
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #55 on: October 23, 2014, 07:00:55 AM »
Quote
"Defenseless" was a waste of the Committee's time, when they could have been fixing real rule problems.

 :thumbup

Fortunately, I think the initial confusion of the first couple of weeks of the season has worn off and everyone, at least in our area, realized there was really nothing new.  Basically they took a POE and tried to make it look like a new rule.

Offline SCHSref

  • *
  • Posts: 413
  • FAN REACTION: +15/-10
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #56 on: October 23, 2014, 01:00:36 PM »
It's a superfluous word in that penalty.

What's the difference between:

3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.  15 yd penalty.

and

3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against an opponent.  15 yd penalty.

In fact, the first one could be misleading.  It implies that helmet-to-helmet contact against an opponent that is not defenseless is not a foul.

"Defenseless" was a waste of the Committee's time, when they could have been fixing real rule problems.

Very easy...A (runner) is moving down the line.  B, who is clearly in A's line of vision, is moving toward him to make a tackle.  A, for whatever reason, does not go out of bounds as B approaches and braces for the impact.  B, lowers his crown and tags A in the earhole.  Illegal helmet contact...but was that a defenseless player?  Nope!

B intercepted the ball and is running when A56 wraps to make the tackle and starts to bring B down, whose forward progress has been stopped and is not sliding side to side trying to wriggle free.  As B drops to the ground, A14 tracks B (from B's blindside) to the ground and delivers a shot to the body with his helmet.  THAT is a defenseless player.

Yes, it has muddied the waters, I don't disagree with that, but according to the rulebook there IS cause for for each flag to be thrown...as much ridiculousness as there might be in all of the muck and mire, it is still there. 

One saw it coming and one didn't.  Difference in my book.  It's cool if we don't agree...no big deal.   :thumbup
If you didn't see it, you can't call it

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Defenseless player
« Reply #57 on: October 23, 2014, 01:04:59 PM »
Or, B on the tail end of a long punt return, thinking the play is over, stops pursuing and trots toward the sideline. A comes along and blindsides him with a cheap shot. According to the new definition B is defenseless because he has let his guard down. Right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline riffraft

  • *
  • Posts: 305
  • FAN REACTION: +18/-19
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #58 on: October 23, 2014, 01:12:03 PM »
Or, B on the tail end of a long punt return, thinking the play is over, stops pursuing and trots toward the sideline. A comes along and blindsides him with a cheap shot. According to the new definition B is defenseless because he has let his guard down. Right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am assuming that you still would have called a foul last year for the same situation. So the addition of "defenseless" has not made any difference on whether you call a foul or not.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #59 on: October 23, 2014, 01:21:36 PM »
One saw it coming and one didn't.  Difference in my book. 
I agree, one saw it coming, one didn't.  But they are both fouls, and they are the same foul: Illegal Helmet Contact.  That fact that one saw it coming and one didn't doesn't change anything.

Offline SCHSref

  • *
  • Posts: 413
  • FAN REACTION: +15/-10
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #60 on: October 23, 2014, 02:01:47 PM »
Just to make sure that I am not trying to argue for the sake of arguing (which I really don't like although my wife would say I am good at it  pi1eOn), I see everyone's view and understand where they are coming from.  Personally, too much individual discretion leads to "issues" when we make a call.  I know not everything can be cut and dry, but it's always nice to know if Bubba is definitely in the neutral zone prior to the snap or not.   ;D
If you didn't see it, you can't call it

Offline Rulesman

  • Past Keeper of the Keys
  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +65535/-2
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #61 on: October 23, 2014, 02:06:44 PM »
I know not everything can be cut and dry, but it's always nice to know if Bubba is definitely in the neutral zone prior to the snap or not.   ;D
That's why we need to make it big. If he's in there, everybody in the yard will know it and the call will be easy. Don't split hairs.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline sir55

  • *
  • Posts: 205
  • FAN REACTION: +12/-5
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #62 on: October 23, 2014, 02:07:22 PM »
The defenseless player rule does matter.  It is intended to take out the cheap shot hits that happen during the game.  While the act of illegal helmet contact is a foul, whether committed on a defenseless player or otherwise, the penalty has been refined to give the official additional rule support to eject the offending player from the game.  The illegal helmet contact rule states that it may be flagrant, but if the same act is committed against a defined defenseless player, the act is flagrant and the offender will be ejected.   

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #63 on: October 23, 2014, 02:33:08 PM »
the penalty has been refined to give the official additional rule support to eject the offending player from the game. 

2012 rule book, rule 9-4-3i:
Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)
NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered
flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players,
and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.

2014 rule book, rule 9-4-3i:
Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle, or spear)
Note: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground.
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players, and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.



Please tell me what changed.

Offline Rulesman

  • Past Keeper of the Keys
  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +65535/-2
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #64 on: October 23, 2014, 02:54:00 PM »
2012 rule book, rule 9-4-3i:
Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)
NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered
flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players,
and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.

2014 rule book, rule 9-4-3i:
Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle, or spear)
Note: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground.
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players, and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.



Please tell me what changed.
You forgot 2013.  nAnA
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #65 on: October 23, 2014, 04:56:49 PM »
You forgot 2013.  nAnA
Didn't have that book in my computer at work.

ADDED IN EDIT:

Just so Curious feels better, the rule from the 2013 book:

Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle, or spear)
Note: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground.
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players, and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.

And 2011:

Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)
NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered
flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players,
and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.

And just to be obnoxious, 2010:

Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)
NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered
flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players,
and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 08:51:07 PM by Atlanta Blue »

Offline NorCalMike

  • *
  • Posts: 770
  • FAN REACTION: +23/-8
Re: Defenseless player
« Reply #66 on: October 23, 2014, 09:47:24 PM »
The only difference is that the 2014 the Rule Book defines what a defenseless player is so us idiot officials know what defenseless means.  So like AB said, if it was a foul this year it was a foul last year. If it was flagrant this year, it was flagrant last year. All the Fed was add the definition so we could talk like the NFL and NCAA.