Spearing

[KB]

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?

[NVFOA_Ump]

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. 

[Blue]

No.  The runner lowering his head and hitting the tackler is a normal football move. 

[jjseikel]

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.

[NVFOA_Ump]

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.

[KB]

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.

[Diablo]

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.

[Blue]

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.

[TXMike]

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. 

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Throw that flag, especially at the HS level. Football move or not, this is flat-out dangerous and should be strictly enforced.

[Blue]

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.

[gsrc]

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!

[Rulesman]

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.

[gsrc]

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.

[Blue]

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.

[TXMike]

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. 

[KB]

Thank you all very much. Great input.
 Now I know how to handle this in the future.

[rickref]

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.

[NVFOA_Ump]

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".

[The Ref Thats Lef]

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".

  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. 

I can't find the play on the DVD I have of the game. If I do I will post it.

[NVFOA_Ump]

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

[wingnut]

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.

[TXMike]

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

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.

[AlAlbany]

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.

[TXMike]

Al - Have you ever flagged a runner for spearing?