Good Block or penalty?

[bigjohn]

the NCAA changed the
spearing rule effective for the
2005 football season. The
word “intent” was removed
from the rule. In reviewing
statistics from the season
following the rule change,
there was essentially no
change in enforcement in
collegiate football. According
to the 2005 NCAA Football
Consolidated Foul Reports,
21 total spearing calls were
made and 21 calls for
butting, ramming with the
helmet.

So this article is incorrect?
http://admin.xosn.com/attachments1/4...DB_OEM_ID=8800

[Welpe]

[bigjohn]

Some causes are worth tilting Windmills!

Catastrophic cervical spine
and close-head injuries are
among the most devastating
injuries in all of sports. The
primary mechanism for those
injuries in football is axial
loading, which occurs when
contact is made with the
crown or the top of the helmet.
Whether that occurs
intentionally or
unintentionally, the axial load
mechanism or spearing
significantly increases the risks
of both permanent cervical
spine injuries as well as closehead
injury.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

Some causes are worth tilting Windmills!

You realize this makes no sense, right? What does it meant to call a cause a "windmill"?

[asdf]

"Here is when I see butt blocking. Traps, guards run down the line and hit defensive players with the front of their helmets and drive their mask into them, often. I had a kid that did it so bad his helmet looked like it had stripes on it. Couldn't get him to stop, because it was NEVER called."


"Yeah, it was all my fault and I should not have played him. I just could not place my QB in that kind of danger. Had I had anyone else to play the kid's position, that could pass block, I would have done exactly what you say. The kids know it does not get called so they hit with their helmet."

"I pull a kid like that and then the parents come in and want to know why. I say, he is using his helmet illegally."

Originally Posted by bigjohn

Some causes are worth tilting Windmills!

And apparently, some are not.

[ref1986]

Originally Posted by mbyron

You realize this makes no sense, right? What does it meant to call a cause a "windmill"?

In the context of Cervantes' allegory it makes perfectly good sense.

[bigjohn]

Thanks 86

Tilting at windmills is an English idiom which means attacking imaginary enemies, or fighting unwinnable or futile battles. The word “tilt”, in this context, comes from jousting.

[bigjohn]

There is blame enough for all involved on that one asdf!

#54 in this picture, check out his helmet.

http://jakigood.smugmug.com/gallery/...3_vYz9B/Medium

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by ref1986

In the context of Cervantes' allegory it makes perfectly good sense.

Perhaps. So?

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

the NCAA changed the
spearing rule effective for the
2005 football season. The
word “intent” was removed
from the rule. In reviewing
statistics from the season
following the rule change,
there was essentially no
change in enforcement in
collegiate football. According
to the 2005 NCAA Football
Consolidated Foul Reports,
21 total spearing calls were
made and 21 calls for
butting, ramming with the
helmet.

So this article is incorrect?
http://admin.xosn.com/attachments1/4...DB_OEM_ID=8800

The article was written by a trainer. He is not expected to know the rule or how we are taught to enforce it. He knows how HE would like to see it handled and maybe how his trainer's association would like to see it handled, but that is NOT necessarily the way it is handled. There was all kinds of hoopla when the NCAA rule was changed but the change was not that much of a change. Even though the word intentional was taken out, it was rewritten to say it was a foul if the contact was done to punish an opponent. To most of us, that still implies there must be intent. "Spearing" was removed completly from the rulebook this year. Now the rule simply says it is a foul to "initiate contact and target an opponent with the crown (top) of the helmet." Maybe I read this with a law enforcement officer bias but if I see a criminal statute that says it is illegal to "initiate" an act and to "target" someone, that ABSOLUTELY implies there must be intent.