NFL - Play over when Helmet Removed

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Rich

So now they'll need to put cameras on the goal line, I suppose. And hire replay officials, too.

Really?

What about the other 13 weeks of the season, including the other 4 knockout rounds? Going to do it there, too?

Let's just change how the game is played or officiated for one game because it's played at Camp Randall and is on TV.

It won't change the way the game is played. Shouldn't change the way the game is officiated, either. It would just be able to correct glaring mistakes like the one I posted in the other thread.

Replay is available for basketball at the state tournament (In Illinois, I know...not sure about other states). It's my opinion that they should do what they can to get calls correct in the biggest game of the year.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Logically the TD should have counted. It should never come down to using replay.

I understand they got it right as far as the rule is written. It's stupid the way the rule allowed the TD to be taken away.

Have you written a letter to the NFL yet suggesting their rule is stupid?

"Thanks for being a fan"

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Ending the play when he's in mid-air versus when he hits the ground has zero impact on player safety and nothing to do with the intent of the rule. Common sense = TD on that particular play.

The rule was put in to you don't have Jason Witten running another 15 yards down the field with no helmet with people trying to tackle him, not to screw a team out of a TD when a guy's going to the ground and his helmet comes off a split second before the ball breaks the plane.

The problem is you would be creating a grey area. The black and white rules are much better. Imagine a helmetless runner in midair and we have an opportunity to hammer down on our whistles to stop a defender who is coming in for the kill shot. By your suggestion, you are wanting this play to remain live and allow the defender to hammer down on this airborne helmetless runner?

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Common sense says it's black and white. The play ends as soon as the helmet comes. It's all about player safety. I'm not advocating instant replay in the high school game at all.

All scores are reviewed in pro and college anyway. Ruling on the spot of the ball when a helmet comes off is no different then overturning a TD when a player was down prior to crossing the goal line.

Just like when they added the rule that requires players to come off the field for a play when their helmet comes off, the purpose is to provide an incentive to players to make sure their lids are secured properly.

Potentially taking away a score is a BIG INCENTIVE to keep your lid on properly. I have my opinions on the amount of replay used has in NCAA and NFL, but it does have the potential, if used properly, to enforce rules that keep players from being more severely injured.

[ajmc]

The logic used to rule that the play stopped the instant the helmet came off, while the player was still in the air, is EXACTLY the type logic that causes most people to HATE lawyers. If the NFL wants people to HATE replay as being petty and insignificant, this would be a great ruling to highlight.

As correctly pointed out, exactly where the helmet came off has little, if anything, to do with actual player safety.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ajmc

The logic used to rule that the play stopped the instant the helmet came off, while the player was still in the air, is EXACTLY the type logic that causes most people to HATE lawyers. If the NFL wants people to HATE replay as being petty and insignificant, this would be a great ruling to highlight.

As correctly pointed out, exactly where the helmet came off has little, if anything, to do with actual player safety.

So say it's 4th & 2 at the 40, RB dives over pile, helmet is dislodged short of line to gain, but RB is not down by contact, then he runs 4 more yards before a whistle blows.

How would you determine where to spot the ball?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

The logic used to rule that the play stopped the instant the helmet came off, while the player was still in the air, is EXACTLY the type logic that causes most people to HATE lawyers. If the NFL wants people to HATE replay as being petty and insignificant, this would be a great ruling to highlight.

As correctly pointed out, exactly where the helmet came off has little, if anything, to do with actual player safety.

OK. Fine. You hate the way it's written.

Write a better one.

[ajmc]

Why do you think someone has to write a better one. All this would have taken, is someone with a pair of.....nickles in his pants, to respond to the first fool who raised the possibility of ANY need to consider EXACTLY where the ball was at the split second the helmet came off, that his question was RIDICULOUS AND OUTSIDE THE INTENT OF THIS RULE.

Is there any other situation where the precise position of the ball actually matters when determining the precise moment when something HAPPENS? As was pointed out earlier on this issue, this is a safety related matter, and stopping play is intended to avoid any further contact to the head of a helmetless player.

Being precise for a reason is far different than being precise jUST TO BE PRECISE. Although it didn't much matter in the grand scheme of things, as they scored on the next play. The actual result of this decision gave one team an UNEARNED advantage over it's competitor, who had fairly and honestly EARNED a score which was somehow justified by an overly tecnical interpretation of a rule, that had absolutely nothing to do with the INTENT or PURPOSE of the rule.

Just as the right amount of garlick can improve any meal, the right amount of fancy technology can enhance the presentation of a game, but as too much garlick can RUIN ANY MEAL, too much reliance on the petty application of technology can RUIN an otherwise very successful and popular game.

As for all those "what ifs", add what if someone got really hurt on the unnecessary replay?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Is there any other situation where the precise position of the ball actually matters when determining the precise moment when something HAPPENS?

Player is diving toward the endzone, his foot touches the side line just before or just after he breaks the plane?

[Welpe]

I had a play a few years ago while working L with Team A snapping from inside the B-5. The fullback took the ball, ran towards the goal line and dove to try and make it in. His helmet was so loose that it went flying off while the ball was at the B-1. I ruled him down at the B-1 because his helmet was clearly off. I was right on the goal line and saw it clear as day.

If I saw it that clearly, you know that a camera on the goal line would see it easily.

A touchdown was not earned, a touchdown was not awarded. When the coach asked what I had, I told him and he understood. He went and laid into his fullback for not wearing his helmet properly.

The fullback's helmet didn't come off the rest of the game.

I will make the same call again if I see it but I suspect that was a once in a career play.

The simple fact of the matter is that the ball is dead when the helmet comes completely off. Same as when the ball carrier's knee is down or he barely grazes the sideline on a long run untouched towards the endzone.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Is there any other situation where the precise position of the ball actually matters when determining the precise moment when something HAPPENS?

Do you realize how ridiculous this question is?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I had a play a few years ago while working L with Team A snapping from inside the B-5. The fullback took the ball, ran towards the goal line and dove to try and make it in. His helmet was so loose that it went flying off while the ball was at the B-1. I ruled him down at the B-1 because his helmet was clearly off. I was right on the goal line and saw it clear as day.

If I saw it that clearly, you know that a camera on the goal line would see it easily.

A touchdown was not earned, a touchdown was not awarded. When the coach asked what I had, I told him and he understood. He went and laid into his fullback for not wearing his helmet properly.

The fullback's helmet didn't come off the rest of the game.

I will make the same call again if I see it but I suspect that was a once in a career play.

The simple fact of the matter is that the ball is dead when the helmet comes completely off. Same as when the ball carrier's knee is down or he barely grazes the sideline on a long run untouched towards the endzone.

Nitpicker.

[Welpe]

I nitpick my nitpicker battles. A whole yard is not nitpicking to me.

[Adam]

The rule is written to protect the runner who has lost his helmet. If he's going to be off-limits for further contact, the ball should become dead. If you want to allow him to gain whatever ground he gets while airborne, then it seems he should be fair game for being hit by the defense until he lands as well. I don't think anyone really would want that.

And as I alluded to previously; if he wants all those yards, he should wear his helmet properly.

[jTheUmp]

How about you change you supposition from this:

Originally Posted by ajmc

... the possibility of ANY need to consider EXACTLY where the ball was at the split second the helmet came off

to this:

... the possibility of ANY need to consider EXACTLY where the ball was at the split second the ballcarrier was down

Now does it seem RIDICULOUS AND OUTSIDE THE INTENT OF THIS RULE?