Targeting - Helmet to Helmet

[bisonlj]

My last comment on the subject is if you plan on working at the college level this is very clearly the kind of contact they want to get out of the game. If we don't we may not have a game to work much longer. And there is a lot of space to target between the knees and shoulders when a runner is upright. We may not like it or agree but it's the way it is. Don't shoot the messenger.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

My last comment on the subject is if you plan on working at the college level this is very clearly the kind of contact they want to get out of the game. If we don't we may not have a game to work much longer. And there is a lot of space to target between the knees and shoulders when a runner is upright. We may not like it or agree but it's the way it is. Don't shoot the messenger.

If they wanted to get that out of the game, they could easily legislate a narrower strike zone. Or some charging rule that'd say that if you take so many steps in a straight line, then you can hit only a narrow strike zone. Or they could change the rule on forward progress to say that if a runner is in an opponent's grasp and fails to break it before the ball becomes dead, the spot is where that condition was established. Lots of ways they could do it and be clear.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If they wanted to get that out of the game, they could easily legislate a narrower strike zone. Or some charging rule that'd say that if you take so many steps in a straight line, then you can hit only a narrow strike zone. Or they could change the rule on forward progress to say that if a runner is in an opponent's grasp and fails to break it before the ball becomes dead, the spot is where that condition was established. Lots of ways they could do it and be clear.

Those aren't any clearer. Just because someone takes a straight line run at someone doesn't mean they are going to foul. There's a difference between these "blow-up" hits and a tackle. Tackles can be violent as well but they usually involve wrapping someone up and bringing them to the ground.

I don't understand your forward progress comment unless you mean a defender wraps up a runner at the A25 and he never breaks it but goes down at the A27 we're bringing the ball back to the A25? I don't agree with that at all.

TV highlights (Sportscenter gets the brunt of it but they all do it) feature these hits so guys do it. They are dangerous for both the hitter and hittee and they often lead to ineffective tackling. The fact they usually hit high around the head make it even worse.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Those aren't any clearer.

They're at least clearly stated. All you have so far is "blow-up", which isn't clear at all.

[Just because someone takes a straight line run at someone doesn't mean they are going to foul. There's a difference between these "blow-up" hits and a tackle. Tackles can be violent as well but they usually involve wrapping someone up and bringing them to the ground.

Well, the criteria for making the ball dead could be changed, that's another possibility. The current provision calling the runner down for having some part of the body other than hands or feet touch the ground irrespective of how they got there (other than for an ostensible place kick) was adopted in the 1930s as a safety measure. The previous rule required the runner to be "so held" that he was brought to the ground or (as now) had his progress stopped. However, it was not illegal to block the runner or contact him in other ways that might slow his progress or knock him down. If they wanted to, they could adopt rugby's code that specifies more or less the old type of tackle but in addition has it illegal to knock him over otherwise.

I don't understand your forward progress comment unless you mean a defender wraps up a runner at the A25 and he never breaks it but goes down at the A27 we're bringing the ball back to the A25? I don't agree with that at all.

Yes, that's what I mean. It would be to take away the motivation of players of the defense to stop the runner's progress under circumstances when they could be sure he'd be brought down.

TV highlights (Sportscenter gets the brunt of it but they all do it) feature these hits so guys do it. They are dangerous for both the hitter and hittee and they often lead to ineffective tackling. The fact they usually hit high around the head make it even worse.

When a runner has good contact with the ground and is being held by an opponent as was the case in the video, the best way to stop his progress is with a high hit. Consider him to be a lever with its fulcrum on the ground. You get the most torque on him -- the best leverage -- by hitting him as far away as possible from the fulcrum. Since head and neck hits are illegal (and would not be as effective anyway, considering the neck's ability to bend), next farthest would be shoulder high. The player delivering the "blow-up" hit did just that, maximizing his leverage and counteracting whatever weight disadvantage he might've had.