« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Another High Hit ? (video)  (Read 8688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-268
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Another High Hit ? (video)
« on: October 01, 2011, 08:28:09 AM »
Logged

Offline AIAFA171

  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2011, 09:11:00 AM »
Looks a legal hit to me.
NC player took 2 steps and moved ball from right to left hand. that's a ball carrier to me and not a defensless player.
Or helmet to helmet. At super slow motion looks like there may have been a helmet to helmet contact (specially from the back endzone view), but at normal speed it looks much more a shoulder to shoulder hit.
I most probably not have called it.
ciao
Logged

El Macman

  • Guest
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2011, 11:47:25 AM »
Not a launch, so no DQ, but definitely leading with the helmet, i.e., targeting, compound with contact above to the head/neck area.
Logged

Offline TxSkyBolt

  • *
  • Posts: 2007
  • FAN REACTION: +45/-46
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2011, 12:23:30 PM »
I didn't see the helmets contact at all...What I saw was the defender leading with his right shoulder which contacted the receiver at his shoulder pad.  Probably at full speed, ground lever, it looked bad.  the covering official thought otherwise though as he didn't launch the flag.

Best regards,

brad
Logged

110

  • Guest
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #4 on: October 01, 2011, 05:24:23 PM »
That gets a pass from me. Nuttin'.
Logged

Offline Welpe

  • *
  • Posts: 1860
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-11
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #5 on: October 01, 2011, 10:27:37 PM »
I see helmet to helmet along with shoulder contact.  I'm fine with this flag.
Logged

Diablo

  • Guest
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2011, 07:26:51 AM »
Quote from: Welpe on October 01, 2011, 10:27:37 PM
I see helmet to helmet along with shoulder contact.  I'm fine with this flag.

I see the term "helmet to helmet" in the context of illegal acts.  Granted initiating contact (leading) with the crown of the helmet and targeting a defenseless player with any contact to his helmet are fouls.  But I don't see how helmet-to-helmet outside of those circumstances is a foul?  Many times during a game we see a ball carrier and tackler make helmet-to-helment contact and no foul is call.
Logged

110

  • Guest
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2011, 08:01:47 AM »
Quote from: Welpe on October 01, 2011, 10:27:37 PM
I see helmet to helmet along with shoulder contact.  I'm fine with this flag.

Like you, I also see contact between two helmets. What I do not see is the use of the helmet as the primary application of force in any angle video, at any speed. The defender led with the shoulder, and the helmet-helmet contact is incidental.

I'm sure you can agree that officials can't penalize every contact between helmets. I mean, the helmets came into use as a recognition that head-to-head contact is largely unavoidable, right?

What the spirit of the spearing rules intend, and the recent clarifications on both sides of the border attempt to minimize, are those cases where the helmet-to-helmet contact is the primary and unnecessary delivery of a blow.
Logged

Offline TxBJ

  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • FAN REACTION: +10/-6
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2011, 12:28:18 PM »
I agree with Diablo.  If you watch the CFO video on these types of hits, I think you will find that this should be a no-call.  The video stresses that in cases like this (not involving a defenseless player) helmet-to-helmet is not a foul when the head is not lowered and used as a weapon.  There is a similar play in the CFO video where the defender turns his head to the side just like in this video and it is deemed no foul.
Logged

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • FAN REACTION: +36/-50
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2011, 12:31:45 PM »
WOW! I really don't see a penalty here...

BUT,

I will repeat what I said about the FSU/OU hit (Thread of 9/18).  This technique (chest high hit to punish) not only leads to helmet-to-helmet contact, but, too often, incorrect calls by officials.

TACKLE WITH YOUR SHOULDER AND WRAP UP!

And bring back leather helmets with no face masks!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged

Offline Dakota Dan

  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-1
  • ΦΑ ΣAE SD Theta
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2011, 05:39:21 PM »
This type of hit will be support from the BCS graders if you throw on it...
Again, the NCAA wants this type of hit of it's game... and the Supervisors are grading as such...
When in Rome do as Rome wants...
Logged

Diablo

  • Guest
Re: Another High Hit ? (video)
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2011, 07:16:51 PM »
Quote from: Dakota Dan on October 02, 2011, 05:39:21 PM
This type of hit will be support from the BCS graders if you throw on it...
Again, the NCAA wants this type of hit of it's game... and the Supervisors are grading as such...
When in Rome do as Rome wants...

If NCAA wants this called foul, why didn't the NCAA Football Rules or PROP committees revise the wording in the rule book?

Quote from: TxBJ on October 02, 2011, 12:28:18 PM
If you watch the CFO video on these types of hits, I think you will find that this should be a no-call.  The video stresses that in cases like this (not involving a defenseless player) helmet-to-helmet is not a foul when the head is not lowered and used as a weapon.  There is a similar play in the CFO video where the defender turns his head to the side just like in this video and it is deemed no foul.

I thought CFO was invented to establish consistency across NCAAland.  What is it gonna take to make this happen?  Should TXMike send videos to every supervisor, get their rulings, create a spreadsheet and post it on CFO?
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »