Difference of opinion on rule

[Aussie-Zebra]

We have encountered dissenting opinion on this and we are interested to see what the views are of the educated ones.

Has anyone seen/called a HCT where the runner was not actually tackled to the ground, but the attempt of a tackle produced the HCT flag ?"

edit: sorry guys this should be in the NCAA rules forum. I had requested the topic be moved.

[AlUpstateNY]

We have encountered dissenting opinion on this and we are interested to see what the views are of the educated ones.

As relates to the NFHS "Horse Collar" Rule (9.4-3-k) "Grab the inside back or side collar of the shoulder pads or jersey of the runner and subsequently pull (backwards of sideward) that opponent to the ground (Horse Collar), even if possession is lost.  The Horse-Collar foul is enforced as a live-ball foul."

To answer your specific question, if the runner breaks free of the grasp, or the play ends otherwise without  the runner being "pulled (backwards or sidewards) to the ground", HC foul does NOT apply.

[ncwingman]

Agree with Al here -- it's a horse collar tackle foul. Without the tackle, you've got nothing.

Also, this "nuance" has surpassed NFL intentional grounding exceptions as the most common cause of coaches screaming at me on the sidelines because they don't know the rules. Also fun is when the defender grabs the collar, but then tackles forward.

[zoom]

I have unfortunately seen this flag come out far too often when the ball carrier was not pulled down to the ground.  This is incorrect.  For it to be a foul, as Al pointed out by citing the rule, the runner MUST be pulled all the way to the ground.  In addition, the primary cause of the ball carrier going to the ground must be the grab itself.  If a player has a grip of the inside back or side collar of the jersey, but the primary act taking the runner to the ground is a tackle about the waist, then it is also no foul.  A key indicator is the buckling of the runner's knees.  If you don't see that, it likely isn't a horsecollar foul.  Even if you do see the knees buckle, however, if the runner stays upright or breaks free and then falls, it is still NO FOUL.


*Edit*  this post was made when the thread was still in the NFHS topic. 

[FLAHL]

 In those instances where the HC is clearly grabbed but the runner does not go down, a quick comment like "Coach, we can't have a foul for horse collar tackle if there is no tackle," tends to reduce the grumbling somewhat.

[#92]

Or maybe "to" is meant as "in the direction of"?

Isn't HCT a foul for safety reasons? And if so, why make the result of the play a factor?

[dvasques]

NCAA, as I seem to recall from having this same doubt a while back, doesn't agree with NFHS here. No need for an actual tackle to be HCT. All you need is an immediate pull down of the ball carrier. And as I recall, if you see the knees buckle, that's a flag.

But I'll let the veterans and experts have a say and keep watching and learning

[bossman72]

NCAA, as I seem to recall from having this same doubt a while back, doesn't agree with NFHS here. No need for an actual tackle to be HCT. All you need is an immediate pull down of the ball carrier. And as I recall, if you see the knees buckle, that's a flag.

But I'll let the veterans and experts have a say and keep watching and learning

I agree.  I've heard the same interpretation for NCAA

[Andrew McCarthy]

I think this may have been one of those CFO interpretations via preseason test answer key.

[TXMike]

http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=10907.0

This may help

[Kalle]

Why this hasn't warranted a bulletin play situation or - better yet - an A.R. still puzzles me. The rule language is extremely ambiguous.