Illegal Helmet Contact

[JRutledge]

When I first saw it I said yes. But when I saw the slow motion and I am not sure. It looks like the snap back was more with being lit up than anything. But really hard to tell.

Peace

[Rich]

It appears the only thing to make contact originally is the helmet. So hard to see this kind of thing on kickoffs with only a few officials on the field.

[Robert Goodman]

Looks like he was obviously leading with the helmet & mask.

What bothers me is that explicitly leading with the mask is still being taught in tackling technique. Not only that, but a supposedly safe tackling technique is taught that disavows use of the mask but that would require extreme dorsiflexion of the neck to avoid it; the latter would work if we had the anatomy of many quadrupeds and birds and could use the prow of the sternum as a ram. And if you dorsiflex your neck but not quite enough to avoid contact, you take it on the chin!

I will say this: Straight-on head contact that results in dorsiflexion of the neck is not as prone to causing neck injury as contact with the crown, contact that results in forward flexion, or a sideways blow to a rotated neck. Whiplash and other dorsiflexion injuries are also usually not as severe an injury as can result from the other kinds. However, even under the most innocent conditions even dorsiflexion can injure seriously; it happened to the mother of someone I know, recently while she was getting shampooed at a beauty parlor!

[JugglingReferee]

Definitely leading with the helmet.

[rockyroad]

That has got to be illegal helmet contact...kid dropped his head and made all the contact with his helmet. If that was the defender hitting the ball carrier like that, it would get flagged - so it should be flagged here also.

[bigjohn]

not sure? Really??? My God, no wonder it never gets called.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

not sure? Really??? My God, no wonder it never gets called.

Maybe you need to look at the Northwestern-Vanderbilt game last season when a Big Ten crew called IHC for a NW player that launched at Vanderbilt player and hit him square and I believe about 3 flags came out on the play as well. The head moved back and it looked like a clear foul. They showed a different angle and there was no helmet contact what so ever. The Big Ten later apologized to the SEC and Vanderbilt for the call that was clearly missed by two other angles that showed there was not helmet contact. And the head snapped back and it looked "obvious."

If it is going to be called, it has got to be right. The kid got jacked up, but this angle is horrible. You can disagree all you want, but there is no conclusive evidence that this took place. It is likely, but not conclusive.

Peace

[InsideTheStripe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

not sure? Really??? My God, no wonder it never gets called.

I wouldn't have called IHC from the camera angle.

[footballref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

When I first saw it I said yes. But when I saw the slow motion and I am not sure. It looks like the snap back was more with being lit up than anything. But really hard to tell.

Peace

I agree that many times we watch a replay and/or slow motion and it changes things. We have to make this call in real time, the first time. Granted, we would see it from a different angle on the field than we do in video.