Legal tackle or not?
 

I don't have the ability to edit, so I'll have to link the whole highlight reel. The tackle in question is 2:33 in. Is it a legal tackle?

Legal or not?

While it certainly borders on unnecessary roughness, I not sure I'd throw it under normal circumstances.

I've cut it and added it to this post to make it easier for others to see.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d1o_lV_Obt0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d1o_lV_Obt0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Regardless, it should've been an incomplete pass. :p

I see nothing wrong with this tackle. Just because he was pulled out of bounds there is nothing illegal automatically about someone landing on their head.

Peace

While I agree with this statement, I'm still not sure about this play. I didn't see a player that just happened to land on his head as the result of a tackle. I see a player picked up and DRIVEN head first into the ground. Was it necessary to drive him into the ground?

Like I previously said, I think I let it go if I see it live. However, I'd probably spend some time wondering if it were a good no-call.

Why is the it punching it back? It is an incomplete forward pass and there should be all kinds of whistles! That is poor officiating IMHO

He is trying to make the tackle. The runner is trying to get away. It was not like the player was not fighting for yardage. If this player does not land on this head, we are not even talking about this. Football is a violent sport and everything took place in-bounds while the ball was considered live (whether that should have been is another issue). It is not about what is necessary; it is about what was done. The play was not over when he threw the ball carrier to the ground.

Peace

Also, anybody have roughing the passer here? I'm leaning towards not but I'm not really sure.

It cannot be roughing the passer on a ruled backward pass. ;)

Peace

True. OK, say it was ruled forward. RTP? :)

Yeah, but the main reason that guy posts is to rip officials.

No I would not have RTP. He was hit almost immediately after the pass was released. At least that is my opinion.

Peace

I know. To be fair, I posted that little tidbit first.

As ruled, I have nothing.

Most officials I know would flag that as UR. Even after blowing the forward pass call.

Most officials I know would NOT flag that. The tackler flipped the runner over, but he did not have the "top-down" leverage required to drive him head-first into the ground. The tackler ended underneath the runner.

You know, I didn't even notice that it was a forward pass. It was ruled a backward pass and unsportsmanlike conduct (arms out to the side mechanic). That was the only call of the night that made me go "HUH?" so I thought I'd check with you guys.

Thanks.

No....

The only reason this guy posts is to rip officials.

Look for him to show up a bit more in the future. Seems he took his football and cleats and went home from the FED site.

FED site
 

What is the FED site? Is it similar to this one?

As a wrestling official (and an ex-wrestler who has been thrown like this many times), I can tell you that "top-down" leverage is not required to actually create significant head-first force into the ground. Where the tackler ended in relation to the runner has little to no bearing on whether or not there was an acceleration down towards the ground and significant risk of head and/or neck injury. By popping his hips up during the throw, I can assure you that plenty of leverage/downward force was created. If you don't believe me, head to a local wrestling practice in November and ask somebody to suplay or salto you. There is a reason throws like this are illegal under NFHS wrestling rules.

The play was over when the defender popped his hips and created the downward acceleration. The forward progress had been stopped. The runner was no longer in contact with the ground. This is akin to a defender catching an airborne receiver, driving him back, and then intentionally depositing him on his head at the whistle. The fact that it was all part of a continuous action leads me to believe that I'd give the defender the benefit of the doubt that the act was not intentional and pass on any foul.

However, I don't thing it is as cut and dry of a no-call as most.

I have no flag on it. The pass did look forward and watching the first 2.5 minutes of the video I saw some poor officiating mechanics...Also, a bit earlier I saw a "fumble" recovery for a TB by B on a play which also looked like an incomplete forward pass. I may go back and take a second look.

side point: I think watching film is an excellent way to review ourselves and get better while being able to see actual plays and situations that hopefully wont be a suprise when we see them live.

I've got nothing illegal here. It just looks bad because it happened near the sideline. Had this happened on the 50 I would have nothing.

I had one this year where a guy tackled the runner and it looked like a Triple H spine buster where he picked the runner up off the ground then slammed his back to the ground.

Did you flag it?

As an ex-wrestler myself, InsideTheStripe broke down the analysis of the tackle pretty well I think. This looks bad but I don't think watching video I'd have a PF on this. On the field, maybe a different story.

Film
 

Where is the best place to find film to watch? I know in another posting the guys were talking about getting copies of their Friday night games from the AD, but I'm not on a varsity crew yet. Do you think the JV coach would give me their film?

this forum vs. nfhs
 

Do you guys patronize both this forum and that NFHS forum or do most people look at just one or the other? Which one is better and why?

I post on several. This one, the NFHS forum and Refstripes.com. There are a few others for baseball and what not but I am a bit of a forum junkie.

I've recently moved to Texas (which uses NCAA rules in football) so I probably won't post much in the football section anymore but I just started basketball and I work baseball so I won't drop off of there completely.

I would say that the NF website for football is probably better. But that is mostly because year-round more officials and coaches frequent that board. There are more detailed discussions on the football side of things. The basketball board is another example of how bad it is on the NF board. Not many conversations or people attend that site. I do not think the issue is which is better? I think the issue is what serves your needs. Both serve my needs to discuss officiating. I am on a couple of other boards that are not quite officiating sites from time to time as well. It is not really that big of deal, I am often trying to pass the time between activities.

Peace