The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)
-   -   Take on Horse collar (https://forum.officiating.com/football/102917-take-horse-collar.html)

Refsmitty Mon Sep 11, 2017 03:15pm

Take on Horse collar
 
Association meeting last night - they were showing one of training tapes and plays put together by Bill LeMonnier.

Runner is grabbed by the pads - swung all the way around in a 360 - and then falls forward in his original direction and goes down with the ball.

I tend to read rules to literally but by rule this is not a horse collar tackle IMO... but I also know everyone in the stadium will be screaming.

It was a good debate but no concensous - what would you call?

Rich Mon Sep 11, 2017 03:45pm

Easy: No foul, by rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

JRutledge Mon Sep 11, 2017 04:04pm

Did Bill say it was a horse collar?

Peace

Refsmitty Mon Sep 11, 2017 08:10pm

Nope
 
Bill didnt say either way.

VA Official Mon Sep 11, 2017 08:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Refsmitty (Post 1009091)
Association meeting last night - they were showing one of training tapes and plays put together by Bill LeMonnier.

Runner is grabbed by the pads - swung all the way around in a 360 - and then falls forward in his original direction and goes down with the ball.

I tend to read rules to literally but by rule this is not a horse collar tackle IMO... but I also know everyone in the stadium will be screaming.

It was a good debate but no concensous - what would you call?

Horse collar tackles were made illegal to prevent injuries that these types of tackles cause, particularly knee/leg injuries. If the runner falls forward, there's no risk of these type of injuries. That's why the rule specifies backwards or sideways. Legal play per the rule, as Rich said.

Rolling Wolf Tue Sep 12, 2017 08:30am

No horse collar penalty as the runner was not pull down backwards and fell in a forward motion. The issue I am running into is officials calling horse collar fouls when runner is pulled down by the back of the jersey and not necessarily pulled down backwards. If it's the jersey and the hand is not inside of the pad, is that a horse collar foul?

JRutledge Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rolling Wolf (Post 1009106)
No horse collar penalty as the runner was not pull down backwards and fell in a forward motion. The issue I am running into is officials calling horse collar fouls when runner is pulled down by the back of the jersey and not necessarily pulled down backwards. If it's the jersey and the hand is not inside of the pad, is that a horse collar foul?

Not according to the high school rule. The grab has to be on the inside part of the pads or jersey. Just grabbing the jersey is not enough. The NCAA added the "name plate" to their definition and there are some officials that probably think that is the NF rule. As of now, it is not.

Peace

CT1 Wed Sep 13, 2017 06:15am

If the purpose of the rule is player safety, why does it matter where the defender grabs the runner?

OKREF Wed Sep 13, 2017 09:49am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CT1 (Post 1009111)
If the purpose of the rule is player safety, why does it matter where the defender grabs the runner?

Because the rule says that a player must grab the inside of the jersey or pads.

CT1 Thu Sep 14, 2017 06:36am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 1009116)
Because the rule says that a player must grab the inside of the jersey or pads.

I understand that. I'm just trying to figure out why the rule wasn't written to cover any instance where the runner is forcibly jerked down backwards.

JRutledge Thu Sep 14, 2017 09:57am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CT1 (Post 1009123)
I understand that. I'm just trying to figure out why the rule wasn't written to cover any instance where the runner is forcibly jerked down backwards.

Then you would have inconsistency in the rule and application.

Peace

CT1 Fri Sep 15, 2017 06:49am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1009125)
Then you would have inconsistency in the rule and application.

Peace

Yeah. Like that never happens. Like we never have to make any judgment calls. :rolleyes:

Robert Goodman Fri Sep 15, 2017 09:51am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1009125)
Then you would have inconsistency in the rule and application.

I think you'd have more consistency, because then it'd be one less thing to need to see closely. Just hand or hands "up there", and resulting backwards jerk of the body.

ajmc Fri Sep 15, 2017 02:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman (Post 1009155)
I think you'd have more consistency, because then it'd be one less thing to need to see closely. Just hand or hands "up there", and resulting backwards jerk of the body.

Can you just imagine the variables, confusion and arguments about the "meaning of" either, "jerked down backwards" or "backwards jerk of the body"

The rule, as written, is pretty clear to anyone who wants to understand it's purpose, as it applies to BOTH teams EQUALLY.

asdf Sat Sep 16, 2017 08:13am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CT1 (Post 1009111)
If the purpose of the rule is player safety, why does it matter where the defender grabs the runner?

Because by grabbing inside the jersey creates more leverage for the defender and allows him/her to pull at a more sudden and greater force than if just the jersey was pulled.

Combine that with pulling from the top is easier and more violent than pulling from the mid back area, and you have the foundation for a horse collar foul.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:53am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1