[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I guess it was a bit snotty, and I'm not the first to think it funny that he'd chime in with a Canadian ruling on threads not asking specifically for one, or even asking specifically for a non-Canadian one, but this is the first time I think the snot was deserved. The crux of the question being asked about doesn't seem to differ from code to code, but is just a matter of how you see it.

I do not totally disagree with that take as most of us never will work a single game under those codes. More of us will work NCAA rules at least. But that is the way it is so just deal with it.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Over the years various specifically detailed types of hits have been added to what's now (AFAIK) covered by Fed as "illegal personal contact", but it's always remained open ended at least as written, with that "other" category. But it seems officials are applying the rule of "the inclusion of one works to the exclusion of others", reading the specific items as exhaustive and ignoring "other".

It is not as open as you suggest. Officials know that there are rules and there are interpretations. No interpretations have ever suggested a foul be called on a hard hit on a ball carrier. Of course if there is a hard hit on someone out of the play then yes we could make that case, but not here. We would not call anything on a runner that hit hard someone that was trying to tackle them. Now if that changes, then I would probably see your point, but that is a big stretch.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I'm just trying to see whether, regardless of whether the hit came under one of the other categories of "illegal personal contact", it was unnecessarily rough. So what are the factors determining whether a hit is necessary?

Where this was previously discussed was a case in NCAA that was penalized, we think, under a provision regarding hitting the head, or hitting with the head, where the video showed it was neither, and then the discussion here turned to whether the hit was unnecessarily rough anyway. Football is substantially the same under these various codes, and since the object of tackling is the same in each (and has been for a long time), the determination of whether a tackle is unnecessarily rough is probably going to be the same in each.

Maybe I am missing something, but I have never seen anywhere that states that is illegal in NCAA rules either. And I hope you are not listening to the media who has completely bastardized the rules changes or emphasis on plays with helmet contact that is called illegal.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What was the same as this case was that the player on defense was moving fast, and the hit was high. What was different was that in that case it was in the open field with both players moving fairly fast, while in this case the runner was being held by an opponent but still moving forward slowly. I think that's causing a difference in how people are seeing these hits. Maybe it's a justified difference, maybe not. I'd like to see discussion of that.

I find these discussions interesting. If I knew how to apply everything, and everyone else knew as well, the discussion would be boring and superfluous.

I understand most of you are focused on whether you see a head hit here, and that's fine. I'm just saying there's another question related to this case that I find more interesting.

It is fine to discuss other issues, but we should also be accurate in our conversations and not suggest something that has never been suggested as fact. Again I will concede on this point if you can show me some kind of suggestion that a hard hit is illegal. But a hard hit is different from a high hit which the contact is primarily with the head. This does not look like it other than if contact took place with the helmet. And the NF did not put the same emphasis on when that could take place like the NCAA. The NCAA often make it clear that ball handlers were not "defenseless players" as other plays would suggest. I will also admit I have not been deep in my books at this time of year considering I work a lot of basketball at this time, but I do not think anything has changed.

Peace