Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron
I agree with 2 key points stated so far:
1. This is a crap tactic by the coach who's asking for the penalty.
2. If the opposing team wants to avoid being "victimized" by such tactics, all they have to do is follow the rules.
That said, I can't see a way to avoid assessing the penalty here. The closest thing would be to say that I didn't see the player participate without the pad on the previous play.
But if I knew he did participate -- if he's the QB, for instance -- it's just not plausible to say that somehow he lost the pad after the play.
So in the end I'd probably do what the R did in this game: assess the penalty and let the chips fall where they may. I agree with Luke's philosophy of enforcing the rules, at least up to the standards set by my state and my association.
|
There is a baseball play that comes to mind, I believe it was George Brett who was using a bat with more pine tar than allowed and Billy Martin was the Yankees manager. Martin saw Brett use the bat several times until one day he hit a crucial home run. Martin asked for the bat to be inspected taking away the home run from Brett.
But more important for football is a missing tailbone protector can subject the player to the possibility of permanent paralysis. I would rather be criticized for "over officiating" than being light on player protection.