Roughing the QB or illegal helmet contact

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

i. Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)
NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be considered a flagrant act. Acts to be considered
flagrant include, but are not limited to:
1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,
2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players,
and/or
3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.


The QB is often defenseless when he is throwing the ball.

If you would not have flagged this tackle had there not been helmet to helmet, then you can't call this RFP or flagrant IHC.

[JRutledge]

I would call roughing the passer for IHC all day and that is how it has been called and interpreted for years. Because the hit is unnecessary and a player that should not be hit at that time.

I have no problem with someone calling it that way and we call it that way with the crews I have been on.

Peace

[kdf5]

This isn't roughing since it's not a hit "after it's clear the ball has been thrown". I don't think anyone but officials would know the difference between IHC and RTP in a situation like this. If you're comfortable misapplying the rules and awarding a first down when you shouldn't then go ahead and call it RTP. 95% of the time 15 yds will give A a first down anyway.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by kdf5

This isn't roughing since it's not a hit "after it's clear the ball has been thrown". I don't think anyone but officials would know the difference between IHC and RTP in a situation like this. If you're comfortable misapplying the rules and awarding a first down when you shouldn't then go ahead and call it RTP. 95% of the time 15 yds will give A a first down anyway.

Did you expect different?

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Did you expect different?

I think you nailed it. If it wasn't roughing without the helmet to helmet contact then why is it roughing with it? If you tack on 15 to the end of a long run rather than applying the rule correctly then you've potentially put your thumbprint on the outcome of the game and I think it's our job to try and not do that as much as possible.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by kdf5

I think you nailed it. If it wasn't roughing without the helmet to helmet contact then why is it roughing with it? If you tack on 15 to the end of a long run rather than applying the rule correctly then you've potentially put your thumbprint on the outcome of the game and I think it's our job to try and not do that as much as possible.

One call or interpretation affects the entire game? Really????

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

One call or interpretation affects the entire game? Really????

Peace

Tacking 15 yards onto a play when you're not supposed to affects the game rather strongly.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

One call or interpretation affects the entire game? Really????

Peace

You did notice, didn't you, that I used the word "potentially". Late in the game, time running out and your wrong call places A into field goal range to win the game when they otherwise wouldn't have the ability certainly affects the entire game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by kdf5

This isn't roughing since it's not a hit "after it's clear the ball has been thrown". I don't think anyone but officials would know the difference between IHC and RTP in a situation like this. If you're comfortable misapplying the rules and awarding a first down when you shouldn't then go ahead and call it RTP. 95% of the time 15 yds will give A a first down anyway.

How this is applied is like any other rule. This is a local issue. And jurisdiction can instruct their officials how to enforce rules and if this falls into a category. We have asked if this was OK and as far as I can tell this is OK with those that interpret the rules. Just like we can debate all day what is allowed in the FBZ on a shotgun formation, your area is who you have to answer to. I think calling this with IHC that is not late is appropriate where I live and work. Might not be the case where you are. And I have not read any information that suggests that this is not the case from the rules makers or make it clear that this does not apply.

Peace

[ppaltice]

I also call Illegal Helmet Contact against the passer as Roughing the Passer. But if you want to read what the rule makers say, they side with KDF5.

2003 Interpretations, Situation 3:

A12 completes a pass, and as he releases the ball, he is tackled by B52, who makes helmet-to-helmet contact. It was not obvious the ball was thrown when B52 made contact. RULING: Illegal personal contact.

It usually doesn't matter one way or the other, except if the pass is complete or the LTG was >15 yards away, it becomes a larger penalty. If you have any doubt, I would definitely say RTP. If the defender lowers his head, I would call RTP as the defender is committing to a personal foul without regards to if the pass will be thrown (i.e. I can no longer judge if the defender had the opportunity to judge if the pass is thrown if he lowers his head).

I certainly would not criticize KDF5 as he is calling the foul by the book.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ppaltice

I certainly would not criticize KDF5 as he is calling the foul by the book.

I love it when guys use a 7 or 8 year interpretation to justify any interpretation in today's terms.

Also no one is criticizing anyone for using the rules to make a decision. The issue is an interpretation which has been made by those since 2003. And considering the frequency of helmet contact of players and how this seems to be an issue, many might have been told to include this as apart of the call. If you can find a 2008 interpretation then maybe that would be reasonable. But a lot has happen since 2003 and again this might be what your local association wants you to do or not do. Always check with them first. This is only for discussion purposes in these types of situations.

Peace