Dallas - Cincy Hit

[voiceoflg]

[JugglingReferee]

Thanks for the video.

I agree with Pereira.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Didn't exist, or saw something that you didn't see, or don't understand?

?????

Why the shot?

He saw helmet contact where helmet contact didn't exist. Watch the video and come back and explain what you mean. What do you think I don't understand?

PS - I'm not saying any of this as a fanboy --- I'm a Cowboy fan if anything, and the call went in their favor.

[asdf]

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

Is that what the official said? (I have no audio for these clips here at work, and thought they said helmet contact when I saw this live).

OK, if that's the case, I'm back to my original question... is this REALLY where we want the league to go --- a receiver who has the ball in his hands and has not yet dropped it is considered defenseless?

[sj]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Is that what the official said? (I have no audio for these clips here at work, and thought they said helmet contact when I saw this live).

OK, if that's the case, I'm back to my original question... is this REALLY where we want the league to go --- a receiver who has the ball in his hands and has not yet dropped it is considered defenseless?

Fans see things like this and go right to ballistic by saying that because calls like this are made the NFL is somehow speaking from on-high and making sweeping and game-altering statements about it's future. When in fact they're just mistakes. That's all. Nothing more. And we've all been there many times.

We'll all find out sooner or later exactly how this call was evaluated. And if it's an incorrect then no one would feel worse than the official who made it. But regardless of what we find out one thing is for sure. He was not trying to change the games future when he threw the flag.

[APG]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

There are legal hits on players in a defenseless posture. It's only illegal to hit a player in the head or neck area with the helmet, shoulder, or forearm, using the crown of the helmet to hit the defenseless players player in any part of his body, or illegally launching into the defenseless player's body.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

How can a receiver, in bounds, still on his feet, with the ball in his hands not be 'fair game' for a hit that is not to his head and/or a hit made by the tackler with his helmet?

There a lots of reasons that the focus on player safety is a really, really good thing. However, this hit is a strong play by the defender preventing a completion.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

?????

Why the shot?

What do you think I don't understand?

What I don't think you understand, Mike, is exactly what the covering official believed he saw, that prompted him to throw that flag. On the field, at that very moment, there's really not a whole lot of difference between what he may have seen and what he truly believed he saw, as least as far as reaching for the flag is concerned.

Considering the speed of play, the skill of the players and the nature of this particular contact, I would think most officials, who may have walked in somewhat similar footsteps, would be inclined to give the covering official the benefit of the doubt. Thankfully, that circumstance doesn't seem to fall under the reviewable situations, so often the final judgment is determined by what the covering official believes he sees, which hopefully matches what he actually sees, and prompts an appropriate reaction.

That official made the call, presumably based on what he believed he saw, without the benefit or the hindsight of replay that slowed the action down to that of a gnat winking as viewed from multiple angles and positions.

Whether from a "fan" perspective or not, there's a point where even constructive criticism, especially when it cannot change or make any difference to anything, can become hyper critical and lose any value it might otherwise offer.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I would think most officials, who may have walked in somewhat similar footsteps, would be inclined to give the covering official the benefit of the doubt.

I see the reason for your misunderstanding now.

I am NOT blaming the officials. The officials are not at fault - they are told to err on the side of safety, and there have been numerous examples of a hit on a not-yet-downed receiver being flagged AT THE DIRECTION OF THE LEAGUE. They are TOLD to call this. And I believe it's step one in the direction of the demise of the league.

I'm blaming the league and/or Roger Goodell. The direction was fine, and somewhat needed ... but we've gone too far. Far too far, yet we keep going further in that direction.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Is that what the official said? (I have no audio for these clips here at work, and thought they said helmet contact when I saw this live).

OK, if that's the case, I'm back to my original question... is this REALLY where we want the league to go --- a receiver who has the ball in his hands and has not yet dropped it is considered defenseless?

Yes, that's how the foul was announced.

Apparently the BJ felt he was defenseless. Bryant proved that to be an incorrect judgment when he immediately popped up and pointed to the flag and ran back to the huddle.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by PSU213

How can a receiver, in bounds, still on his feet, with the ball in his hands not be 'fair game' for a hit that is not to his head and/or a hit made by the tackler with his helmet?

There a lots of reasons that the focus on player safety is a really, really good thing. However, this hit is a strong play by the defender preventing a completion.

Not disagreeing with you.

It was a blown call by a good official.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by APG

There are legal hits on players in a defenseless posture. It's only illegal to hit a player in the head or neck area with the helmet, shoulder, or forearm, using the crown of the helmet to hit the defenseless players player in any part of his body, or illegally launching into the defenseless player's body.

Not saying I agreed with the call, just saying what was announced as the reason for the flag.