Author Topic: Questionable plays resulting in injury  (Read 5028 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

will27

  • Guest
Questionable plays resulting in injury
« on: September 22, 2014, 04:29:11 PM »
Two incidents from the weekend that led to serious injuries with no
penalty being called in either case:


Paul James (Rutgers) broke through Navy's front and was running at speed; a Navy defender attacked him from a side angle and tackled him, helmet-to-knee. James' season is over.
The tackler's arm may have been somewhat involved, but he drove the crown of his
helmet into the side of the runner's knee.


A Steelers D-lineman was engaged with the ball carrier, wrestling him up high, while the whistle had not yet been blown. A Carolina offensive lineman flew in and blocked (not from behind) the Steelers lineman up high violently knocking him into Shazier.
Last I heard, Shazier was scheduled for an MRI on his MCL.

Were either of these plays, while dangerous, illegal in any way (not that it would have helped either of the injured players)?

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 1029
  • FAN REACTION: +56/-11
Re: Questionable plays resulting in injury
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2014, 04:49:49 PM »
In the first one, ball carrier does not get any special protection. The only person who gets extra protection on low hits is a player in a passing posture. Sounds like it was a legal tackle that just had a bad result.

The second one is a little harder without film, so let me make sure I understand what's going on. B1 is in the process of tackling ball carrier A1. A2 then blocks B1 into B2. Sounds like a whole lot of nothing.

What did you think would make either of these illegal? Unfortunately injuries happen. Just because somebody gets injured doesn't mean there was a foul.

Offline dvasques

  • *
  • Posts: 508
  • FAN REACTION: +13/-2
Re: Questionable plays resulting in injury
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2014, 10:55:19 PM »
I didn't see either play but from the description of the first one by will27, could that not me TGT under 9-1-4? if he forcibly hit the opponent with the crown of his helmet?

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 1029
  • FAN REACTION: +56/-11
Re: Questionable plays resulting in injury
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2014, 11:21:12 PM »
I didn't see the crown of the helmet part the first time through, but yes, if it was truly with the crown it would be targeting. Although it seems that some people like to call the forehead the crown of the helmet, so I'd like to see video before I called it targeting.

Fatman325

  • Guest
Re: Questionable plays resulting in injury
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2014, 10:16:11 AM »
I saw this play and it appears to be just a low tackle on a runner. The crown of the helmet does not appear to be a factor here and it would be tough to flag for 9-1-3. Crown plays are what old guys would call Spearing and are not as common as 9-1-4 plays.

will27

  • Guest
Re: Questionable plays resulting in injury
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2014, 04:51:13 PM »
Yeah, got a chance to see it again. It was a helmet to the knee during the act of tackling; no intent to spear or otherwise injure. The poor kid tore his ACL, but in the open field you've got to use your vision.