Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
I'm not trying to stir up anything either, but I would counter that given the case play and the rule, saying that contact by a second player negates a HC foul is actually putting words in that aren't there.
|
IMO inserting words is the result of a more fundamental error, namely that of misinterpreting the case play.
The case play covers one possible case, namely where an additional tackler prevents a horse collar from becoming a horse collar TACKLE, and thus prevents the foul.
Another possible case is one where an additional tackler, perhaps approaching from behind the runner, also grabs the runner's jersey or pads from the side or behind, and also pulls the runner backward to the ground. That would be a double horse collar, and to my mind, an obvious horse collar tackle foul. It seems preposterous to claim that it's no longer a foul because there are now 2 players committing a horse collar tackle.
To conclude from the first possible case that "second contact by defense negates the horsecollar" seems to me a misinterpretation of the case.