The Game is Changing

[TXMike]

I understand the great and justified concern over concussions.  But the fact remains, there is no way to totally prevent them.  There are going to be big hits and sometimes they will lead to concussions.  Nobody is forced to play the game. 

In this play we see a player who is very restricted in his ability to block low due to the rules.  He, like all other players, is also restricted in his ability to hit high.  I guess we can institute a rule that says all blocks have to be between the waist and the chest of the hittee but that is gonna be real hard to officiate much less to play.

http://youtu.be/xKDz-P821Fw

[NVFOA_Ump]

Was the call for the initial hit to the chest or for the instant followup flying elbow that caught the defender on his chin and whipped his head back?  Would we have seen a flag if the elbow wasn't part of the block?

[bama_stripes]

Is this not considered a "launch"? He might have been legal except for that.

[TxSkyBolt]

Is this not considered a "launch"? He might have been legal except for that.

No launch, his foot was on the ground when contact was made and only came off after the hit.  Perhaps the trailing official, from his angle, viewed it as higher than it was?

[TxSkyBolt]

Was the call for the initial hit to the chest or for the instant followup flying elbow that caught the defender on his chin and whipped his head back?  Would we have seen a flag if the elbow wasn't part of the block?

I don't see an elbow hitting the player.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Maybe no actual solid contact but the elbow came flying up at the same time the head went back.  The question is, do we think we would have had a flag if the elbow stayed down and we just had the shoulder to the chest part?

[blindref757]

I think that 80W breaks down just prior to contact, and hits 18R with an upward motion.  By the time the play is complete (in real time), I can see how the covering official might make the call...especially with the POI and the philosophy of "flag it when in doubt".  It is obviously a punishing hit...and it could have been just as punishing had the hit been between the numbers of the chest but probably doesn't get the call. 

And yes...I agree that the game is changing.  This stuff is a lot harder to referee!

[sj_31]

IMO, this is absolutely a foul.

1. It was a blindside hit--yes they happen in football but the rules committee and RR want them out of the game.

2. The intent here was to punish, not just block. He was swimming upstream and lit this guy up. He knew what he was doing and he did it.

3. While he didn't actually get a good airborne launch, he launched.

4. Every single supervisor I know would want this called.

5. Many supervisors I know would support an ejection.

Like the title of the thread, the game is changing. Don't overthink it. Just use RR's philosophy for UNSs to these: If it feels wrong, flag it. If it's feels ok, let it go. But protect the players too. UNSs hurt feelings. UNRs put kids in the hospital.

Don't ticky-tack, but don't keep your flag in your pocket because you think it "was a good football hit" and "that's part of football." There's no shortage of video at our disposal to let us know this is a foul.

This really is not that hard of a play to officiate.

[TXMike]

Would you also say flag if this hit had been at the knees (which frankly would have been more devastating)?

[BankerRef]

Would you also say flag if this hit had been at the knees (which frankly would have been more devastating)?

A hit at the knees is also a clear foul under the rules as they are written (9-1-6-a-1).  Flag.

[maven]

The game IS changing. Players are bigger, stronger, and faster. That leads to collisions with greater energy and greater probability of injury. Remember that the energy of the collision varies with the SQUARE of the velocity: small increases in players' speed yield large increases in potential for injury.

Consequently, our philosophy of "unnecessary" must evolve in order to promote the good of the game. I see nothing objectionable about such an evolution, and I think that it has been underway for some time.

The notion that this kind of hit is entertaining and belongs in football strikes me as cruel and inhumane, and fails to appreciate just how fast and big today's players are.

[Mark Liggett]

Every block is punishing....it's supposed to be, that's why they wear pads.  I'm more concerned with whether or not this hit will be a foul next year vs if it is this year, or if a hit similar to this but less dramatic will soon be subject to a penalty.
Concussions, I get it, Franchise players, yeah I get that too... but changing the rules, changing how they are interpreted, altering the philosophy behind them every year because of a high profile hit or injury does just as much damage as one hit.   Players, coaches and surely officials are better served by a static set of rules.
I would've received a "big stick" award had I leveled that defender when I played.
There are plenty of other sports to participate in if all this hitting is too much.......

[TXMike]

A hit at the knees is also a clear foul under the rules as they are written (9-1-6-a-1).  Flag.

  I am talking about a block below the waist towards the appropriate adjacent sideline

[sj]

What about this being a target of and  initiating contact to the neck area?  9-1-4

While not listed specifically as a defenseless player it would seem the definition would fit the defender.

[TXMike]

If someone pursuing a ball carrier, intending to tackle him, is considered defenseless then I would like to know who on the field is NOT defenseless? ? ? ?

[Mark Liggett]

If someone pursuing a ball carrier, intending to tackle him, is considered defenseless then I would like to know who on the field is NOT defenseless? ? ? ?

 

[maven]

Players, coaches and surely officials are better served by a static set of rules.

I would've received a "big stick" award had I leveled that defender when I played.
There are plenty of other sports to participate in if all this hitting is too much.......

I get the concern about slippery slope. But there's no such thing as a static set of rules in any sport that survives more than 2 years. The rules always evolve, in every sport, for the betterment of the game. It's NEVER a question of "whether" the rules will change, but how, and for what reasons.

As for the idea that "all this hitting is too much," I guess you choose to ignore my remarks about the physics of the collisions that are happening now. Comparing them with your big stick awards kinda misses the point.

[JasonTX]

For those who say to flag this hit, please explain what the blocker needs to do to make the block legal. 

[BankerRef]

  I am talking about a block below the waist towards the appropriate adjacent sideline

I was just commenting on your question regarding this particular hit.  If it was below the waste it would have been a foul just as it was in this case for being too high.  The blocker was beyond the neutral zone and was blocking back toward his own goal line.  A block at the knees is a foul.  Adjacent sideline is not applicable.

[TXMike]

I am saying if he managed to get a few more  centimeters towards the sideline and could have made the block low and towards the opposite sideline, would you still flag?  I am essentiallytrying to get to the question that wa sjust asked..what could he have done to make the block legal in your eyes?

[NVFOA_Ump]

IMO, this is absolutely a foul.

1. It was a blindside hit--yes they happen in football but the rules committee and RR want them out of the game.

And where do we know that from?  A downfield blocker can't block back toward his own goal line chest high with a shoulder hit if the defender heading right at him isn't actually looking at him?  Whose going to write the rule language for that?

[BankerRef]

For those who say to flag this hit, please explain what the blocker needs to do to make the block legal.

Everything else the same; if the blocker in this case wants to ensure himself of a legal block he should get his hat level completely below the neck area of the targeted player. He will not get the benefit of the doubt very often if his hat level is anywhere near the same level as the player he is blocking.

[maven]

And where do we know that from?  A downfield blocker can't block back toward his own goal line chest high with a shoulder hit if the defender heading right at him isn't actually looking at him?  Whose going to write the rule language for that?

No new rule required. Unnecessary roughness is already illegal. Only the scope of 'unnecessary' needs interpretation.

[Mark Liggett]

As for the idea that "all this hitting is too much," I guess you choose to ignore my remarks about the physics of the collisions that are happening now. Comparing them with your big stick awards kinda misses the point.

I didn't ignore your remarks...I didn't read them until after I had offered my post.  But, respectfully, I don't agree... I think it is exactly the point as it relates to the title of the post.  The Game is Changing.  Surely rules will be tweaked and adjusted every few years but I think we're moving into a "social change" now.  I would offer that "big hits" such as this one are becoming more and more socially unacceptable and that's too bad because it does take away from the core of the sport that is Football.  The tackle box can be redefined every two years.... sigh.... who can block below the waist, when & where... sigh.... but this is, in my opinion, the furthest thing from a foul and the fact that it is even considered takes away from the sport.

[maven]

I would offer that "big hits" such as this one are becoming more and more socially unacceptable and that's too bad because it does take away from the core of the sport that is Football.  The tackle box can be redefined every two years.... sigh.... who can block below the waist, when & where... sigh.... but this is, in my opinion, the furthest thing from a foul and the fact that it is even considered takes away from the sport.

Fair enough. We can just disagree about whether these changes better the sport. "Real football" fans hated helmets when they first came in and said they would destroy the game.

Those who demand a higher probability of maiming can always watch NASCAR.