RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: KB on July 25, 2006, 06:20:49 AM
-
Saw this in last weekend's Eurobowl game:
Running back sweeps to the side, and only a defensive back is between him and a possible TD.
Instead of trying to outmove the DB, the RB puts his head down and hits the DB squarely in the chest with his helmet. Both fall in the direction of the EZ (no TD was scored).
Now, would you flag this as spearing?
-
Absolutely, if runner clearly initiated contact using the crown of his helmet, under NCAA rules that would be spearing. Also, note that in 2005 rule book Points of Emphasis , the rules committee twice stressed the need to get spearing out of the game. The rules clearly say that no player can use the helmet as a weapon to "punish an opponent". Both players are at risk for injury when the helmet is used in this manner. ^flag
-
No. The runner lowering his head and hitting the tackler is a normal football move.
-
NCAA may be different but NF 9-4-3 i prevents allowing a player (ball carrier or not) from using his helmet to punish an opponent! Simple as that, whether it's a "football move" or not.
-
A few reminders:
1. 2005 NCAA Rules - Points of Emphasis on page 8 under UNETHICAL PRACTICES: ".. Using the helmet as a weapon. The helmet is for protection of a player."
2. 2005 NCAA Rules - Points of Emphasis on pages 13 & 14 under THE FOLLOWING ARE UNETHICAL PRACTICES: "d. Spearing. Players, coaches, and OFFICIALS should EMPHASIZE the elimination of spearing."
3. 2005 NCAA Rules - Section 2, Article 24, Spearing: Spearing is the use of the helmet .... in an attempt to punish an opponent.
Using the helmet to "lead" on a block, a tackle, or any other intentional contact is both illegal, and a safety issue. The helmet is intended to be used, and very clearly required by the rules to only be used, as protective equipment, no exceptions. No player is allowed to "lead with his helmet" on any play.
-
I really started the kind of discussion I intended to :)
I am especially interested in the difference in calling this between NFHS, NCAA in high schools (Texas!) and NCAA in the collegiate level.
Blue, what level are you officiating?
Collegiate level is probably what most foreign coaches and players would expect us to follow over here.
To clarify about the hit, it was not a protective move to get by the defender, it was really targeted at his breast to topple him backwards and looked a lot like the thing Zidane did in the FIFA soccer final.
-
NCAA rules prohibit using a helmet to specifically “punish” an opponent. This applies to a tackler as well as a runner. If it’s not obvious that the player is leading with his head in an effort to intentionally inflict harm, it’s not a foul – ramming, butting, or spearing. As I see interpret that, it’s OK for a runner to lead with his helmet if he is trying to wedge out a hole in a mass of humanity.
-
Guys, just because a runner hits a tackler hard with his helmet or just because a tackler hits a runner hard with his does not necessarily constitute "punishing" and therefore is not a foul. A runner and a tackler that run into each other helmet to helmet have not fouled if they are doing normal football moves even though we have rules and/or interpretations prohibiting helmet to helmet contact. To punish an opponent with the helmet, a player must hit an opponent already down or after his progress has been stopped; he must "launch" into the opponent, etc. Usually a defensless player gets "punished"; someone in a position to defend himself if he wanted to does not.
As for this specific play, I have not watched it so I really am not passing judgment whether this particular runner fouled or not, but I would suspect he didn't. I remember Earl Campbell lowering his head, hitting the tackler in the chest and disjointing him. That wasn't a foul then and it's not a foul now.
-
Yet another fine example of the Rules Committe screwing things up. They reportedly wanted to crack down on helmet-leading contact and did some serious lobbying. The Committee responded by "tightening up" the spearing rule. In reality, they loosened it IMHO when they added the language "in an attempt to punish an opponent." Once that was in there then it made refs judge on whether the helmet-leading contact was an attempt to punish. If not, then by defintiion, it is not a foul. That call requires more judgment than the way the rule was worded previous to that change.
-
Throw that flag, especially at the HS level. Football move or not, this is flat-out dangerous and should be strictly enforced.
-
There are a lot of things in football that are dangerous but are not fouls and this is one of them. Throw the flag on this and you're making a mistake.
-
There are a lot of things in football that are dangerous but are not fouls and this is one of them. Throw the flag on this and you're making a mistake.
Blue, glad to see your opinions and expertise have found their way here. The "other board" has become a little slow and overrun with spam.
As to the play in question, I was just reading the Fed Rules by Topic book this past week and from what I remember, it said that a ball carrier could get penalized for this type of play. I can see how this play may meet the definitions set forth in the rule book. But I would have a really hard time calling a penalty on something like this unless it was malicious and blatant/flagrant.
As for NCAA, give me a week or so so I can catch up on the rest of my reading!
-
There are a lot of things in football that are dangerous but are not fouls and this is one of them. Throw the flag on this and you're making a mistake.
YOU explain that to the family of the player laying motionless on the field because he just broke his neck leading with his helmet. If you are going to allow it, you also better be sure you also have your liability insurance premium paid up, because when you offer that explanation, you will most likely wind up being sued.
-
YOU explain that to the family of the player laying motionless on the field because he just broke his neck leading with his helmet. If you are going to allow it, you also better be sure you also have your liability insurance premium paid up, because when you offer that explanation, you will most likely wind up being sued.
In relation to the play in question, I think there is a different mindset that comes into play here. From a HS standpoint, this is something that certainly deserves a stern talking-to to the player and possibly even a follow-up talk with the coach. As for flagging it, possibly.
Now, from an NCAA level, this is where it gets a little fuzzy. I'm not sure a flag would be appropriate. And I don't even know the sternness of the conversation/comment made to the player. I feel that at that level, the player should be told "Keep your head up," or "Don't lead with your head, it will get you hurt," would be sufficient.
-
Well, Rulesman, what are YOU going to tell the parents when a player is carried off with a career ending knee injury because he was high/low blocked simultaneously by adjacent linemen in or behind the neutral zone? What are YOU going to tell the parents because a knee was destroyed by a low block by a back that was lined up inside the tackles but took a running start cutting a linebacker with a block below the waist going away from the ball? What are YOU going to tell the parents when a runner has a punctured lung from broken ribs which were the result of a form tackle? Football is a very violent game and, as I said before, there are lots of things that are dangerous but not illegal.
I have been officiating football for 28 years, Rulesman, and I have a pretty good idea what spearing is. I've called it many times, but I've NEVER seen a runner spear a tackler.
-
YOU explain that to the family of the player laying motionless on the field because he just broke his neck leading with his helmet. If you are going to allow it, you also better be sure you also have your liability insurance premium paid up, because when you offer that explanation, you will most likely wind up being sued.
If you are that worried about being sued then perhaps you should find another hobby. I can conceive of a play hypothetically where the runner obviously spears a potential tackler. However, I have never seen that play in real life. Just because a runner is going through the line with his head down and his helmet hits an opponent does not mean it is spearing. In fact, under the NCAA code, unless you judge the helmet was used to "punish" it is not spearing at all.
-
Thank you all very much. Great input.
Now I know how to handle this in the future.
-
YOU explain that to the family of the player laying motionless on the field because he just broke his neck leading with his helmet. If you are going to allow it, you also better be sure you also have your liability insurance premium paid up, because when you offer that explanation, you will most likely wind up being sued.
Flag probably won't bring back the fact he just broke his neck. I think this does get very hard to rule on because you must be certain his intentions were punish the team b player. Can be a tough situation.
-
Most of the posters seem to be missing the fact that if you flag it once, just like most other major penalties, you probably won't see it again. We need to send the message that legal tackles, blocks, etc. are made with initial body contact other than the crown of the helmet. And we're not talking about the running back who lowers his shoulder and pounds into the pile. We're talking about the player who clearly lowers his head and leads with a pounding helmet hit. That's illegal in both codes.
We should all read the "Points of Emphasis" in the rulebook a little more carefully. I'm also not sure how a player can lead with the crown of the helmet without us making the judgement that it was "intentional".
-
I'm also not sure how a player can lead with the crown of the helmet without us making the judgement that it was "intentional".
>:D He is protecting the ball with his arms and body and trying to get yardage. Not his fault if the tackler stands in his way. >:D
I can't find the play on the DVD I have of the game. If I do I will post it.
-
Everybody really needs to take the time to watch this 15 minute video, especially those who don't think the original play described here should draw a flag.
http://www.nata.org/consumer/headsup.htm (http://www.nata.org/consumer/headsup.htm)
-
I have often thought that Earl Campbell (in the famous clip mentioned earlier) was guilty of "using his helmet to butt or ram an opponent in an attempt to punish him". I just figured that the rules were different back then. When I read the initial post on this thread, that's the play I envisioned.
So, if I saw this play in an NCAA game I would throw a flag on Earl. It would take a while to get my flag out of my pocket though, because I would be initially stunned at the sight.
But, do you think that my supervisor would categorize that foul as "somewhat technical"? Maybe. Maybe not. It probably depends on whether or not he saw Roy's video.
And as the video pointed out, defenders (DBs especially) are much more likely to be "suspects" for this foul. If egregious, like Earl or worse, I think a runner could also be guilty.
As an unimportant side note, I was flagged and DQ'd from my final HS football game for butt blocking. That's what they taught us to do back in the '70s. I'm lucky I'm not paralyzed.
-
Everybody really needs to take the time to watch this 15 minute video, especially those who don't think the original play described here should draw a flag.
http://www.nata.org/consumer/headsup.htm (http://www.nata.org/consumer/headsup.htm)
That was done by the trainers when they prepared to go to the Rule Committee and lobby for the major changes in the spearing rule. It is clear from the very minor change that ended up being made to the rule that the rulemakers did not buy into all that the trainers wanted. And as I have said many times, the actual change even ended up being LESS restrictive than the original rule IMHO. The trainers do not write the rules and should not be the ones we look to for any guidance on how to officiate the game.
-
With all due respect to the concept of "a football move", there doesn't seem to be much doubt that rule makers, and everyone else, recognize that any use of the head, to deliver any kind of blow, is probably the most dangerous thing any football player, on offense or defense can risk. The type of injuries possible are simply too horrific to ignore. Probably 80% of the "Points of Emphasis" over the last 10-15 years have related to eliminating some type of contact using the head to block, tackle, or spear.
The fact that someone who can never walk again was a runner, rather than a defensive back, doesn't seem to make much of a difference. What Earl Campbell did was "then", this is "now". Rules have evolved over the years to require face masks and helmets, that were once optional. The "Flying wedge" was declared illegal, although it was often effective. "Chop Block" is no longer legal, because it was deemed too expensive, as was traditional blocking below the waist. The game evolves, as do the rules.
"Lowering the head", to gain additional yardage and using the head to batter, bash, butt a potential tackler are two different things. If you can't tell the difference, or can't explain your logic to a coach, parent or anyone else who can't understand the difference, maybe football is not your game. All that really matters is that officials understand and appreciate the difference, and have the guts to do what is right, rather than be at all concerned about what others, who are wrong, think.
-
Al - Have you ever flagged a runner for spearing?
-
Hopefully that fact that we have never previously flagged a penalty for a clear rules violation has no part in our decision to flag it when we do see it.
-
?????? If you saw the same act before and did not flag and there is not a rule change, why would you consider flagging it now???
-
IMO when we getter more educated in the rules and the clear intent of the rules and we better understand that we really should have been flagging something all along, we've become better officials. With all of the information I've read and seen since the end of last season I'm now of the clear and unquestionable opinion that any player that lowers his head and leads with his helmet is without question trying to punish his opponent.
That fact that we did not flag it "last year", or even last game, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that we should be getting it right. That applies no matter how many times we've failed to get it right in the past.
This year every hit where any player lowers his helmet such that first contact is with the crown of the helmet gets my flag. ^flag
-
Roy, with all due respect, if you call a spearing foul every time a runner lowers his head and hits a potential tackler, it is going to be a long season for the teams you work, their coaches, their fans, your crewmates and yourself. I can tell from your posts that you know your rules and I would assume you're a good official. But, you are taking this too far. I watched a replay of the Rutgers spring game tonight on CSTV and runners lowered their heads and hit would-be tacklers on almost every play. There was no intent to punish anyone. It's part of the game. Dangerous as it may be, it is part of the game. Your flag isn't going to change that; it's only going to make you look like an "over-officious jerk". Take some advice from someone that's been around a long time, call this just like you have in previous years.
-
IMO when you see spearing it will stand out to you. Just like pass interference, blocking below the waste, etc. You guys don't need to go hunting spearing calls. If you look for them you will find something that resembles it every play somewhere on the field. (just like holding). Call the obvious and let the rest of go.
-
Blue, I think Brian has it right. When you see the actual play you will know when it's spearing. And I've only seen it called a couple of times. That being said, the play described that started this long ago looks to me when I envision it in live action as a classic spearing call. No played can intentionally do what is described in the play without it being spearing. Two players out in the open field coming together at full speed and just before contact one lowers his head and leads with the crown of his helmet.
-
I think most everyone agrees, that you bascially have to see what the runner did in this particular instance. But, the rule does not exclude offensive players. It says, "No player".
k. No player shall continuously contact an opponent’s helmet (including
the face mask) with hand(s) or arm(s) (Exception: By or against the
runner).
l. No player shall use his helmet (including the face mask) to butt or ram
an opponent in an attempt to punish him (A.R. 9-1-2-XVI).
m. There shall be no spearing (A.R. 9-1-2-XVII).
n. No player shall strike a runner with the crown or the top of his helmet in
an attempt to punish him.
-
I agree with Blue's axiom: don't go looking for something that isn't there, don't trouble trouble.
I would have to see evidence of an extraordinary and/or flagrant personal foul for me to judge spearing against a runner. I don't think it's impossible, but it would definitely be a "freak" play. A runner simply lowering his head to fight for extra yardage doesn't meet that standard, in my opinion. I think the Earl Campbell clip might.
I am much less technical when judging spearing against the defense.
-
http://youtu.be/gtXfgSiEb0A
Do we throw a flag for this type of contact?
-
I am in agreement that in the original question, I would not call a foul at the high school level. However, I would like the UIL to consider this as a point of emphasis, so that this practice is called at either sub-varsity or junior high levels. I see this at many junior high games where the biggest, fastest, strongest kid is the running back and he will lower his head and bowl over defenders. I have never called it but it has scared me a few time.
If we could stop the practice there, it might slow it down or stop it at higher levels.
-
take off their helmets/shoulder pads and put flags on them..
problem solved.
hEaDbAnG
-
I've called this on the runningback before. It's gotta be pretty serious - like this. Then again, it's also noted in the language of the Canuck rule book that the ball carrier is also just as responsible for controlling his head as the tacklers.
-
Points of Emphasis
The NCAA Football Rules Committee has extraordinary pride in the Football
Code, which was introduced in 1916 and has been updated several times.
These guidelines form a harmony of agreement among coaches, players, game
officials and administrators that places each contest in an environment of
fairness and sportsmanship. It is noted that the Code emphasizes the following
unethical practices: “Using the helmet as a weapon. The helmet is for protection
of the player...” and “players and coaches should emphasize the elimination of
targeting and initiating contact against a defenseless opponent and/or with the
crown of the helmet.” Every participant in the collegiate football scene shares
a responsibility for ethical conduct that enhances the future of this American
tradition.
PROTECTION OF DEFENSELESS PLAYERS AND CROWN-OFHELMET
ACTION—In 2008, the committee introduced a separate rule
prohibiting initiating contact with the helmet and targeting a defenseless
opponent. These actions are now in two rules: Targeting/Initiating Contact
With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3) and Defenseless Player: Contact to
Head or Neck Area (Rule 9-1-4). Use of the helmet as a weapon and intentional
(targeted) contact to the head or neck area are serious safety concerns. Flagrant
offenders must be disqualified from the game. The committee continues to
emphasize that coaches and officials must be diligent to insure that players
understand and abide by these rules.
-
http://youtu.be/gtXfgSiEb0A
Do we throw a flag for this type of contact?
I wouldn't.
See AR 9-1-4-2. As ball carrier A20 sweeps around the end and heads upfield, he lowers his head and contacts defensive end B89 who is trying to tackle him. The players meet helmet to helmet. RULING: No foul. Neither A20 nor B89 is a defenseless player and neither has targeted his opponent in the sense of Rule 9-1-3.
-
If the runner hits him with the crown of the helmet he should be flagged for it.
Rule 9-1-3: No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.
This rule would justify the flag (again if with the crown of his helmet). In reviewing a game film once, I saw a runner lower his head and take out the defensive back. There should have been a flag on the but the two officials that saw it did not because it was the runner. After looking at the film, we all were in agreement that it should have been flagged.
IMO it is easier to wave off a flag (after some discussion), than to ignore a possible foul that could injure a player.
-
I had a running back on my team a few years ago who could have been flagged for spearing on a regular basis.
You know in movies how two guys in a bar square off and one leans back a bit, then like a cobra strikes forward and gives a headbutt? This player did that to the tacklers on a regular basis. You could clearly see him pulling his head back and throwing it forward to strike with as the tackler got to just the right position.
If I remember correctly he got called for it a few times as well (when it was flagrent).
Wouldn't stop him doing it again - some tigers can't change their stripes.