|
“Because it’s inherently dangerous.” “This rule is all about safety.” Why is it more dangerous to hurdle “..over an opponent who is contacting the ground with no part of his body except one or both feet” than it is to hurdle over a player who has a knee or hand on the ground? Why is one more vulnerable than the other? There are thousands of examples where we ignore acts or conditions that are “inherently dangerous” and could be considered unsafe. Two opposing players run full speed from opposite directions into each other - legal. A receiver jumps high and extends his arms over his head to catch a pass, the defender hits him below the waist before he returns to the ground and the receiver flips over and lands on his head - legal. A 280 pound offensive lineman pulls around the end or runs through the line into the secondary and crushes a 130 pound defensive back - legal. The whole game of football is inherently dangerous but to call an illegal personal contact foul on someone who has used a very athletic move and avoided all contact (or virtually all if there is only incidental contact) seems arbitrary and difficult to defend. (I’m going to post another video example if I can figure out how to do so.)
|