Wouldn't this be considered hurdling? and be a flag!!

[Robert Goodman]

I'm not sure it met the technical requirement of hurdling, and if it did I'm not convinced penalizing it would be in the spirit of the rule. It looked like the ballcarrier more or less jumped in place (although I couldn't see his feet when he started to leave the ground), although he did extend his right foot forward while in the air. The attempted tackler may have had his feet on the ground, but was bent very low at the waist, and more went under the ballcarrier than the ballcarrier went over him. This is not the classic case of someone leaping forward crotchwise over the head of an opponent, and if there was a chance of contact with that opponent's head, it was caused more by the tackler than by the putative hurdler. The ballcarrier went mostly over the attempted tackler's back.

I'm not sure whether the rules definition of "hurdle" should be eliminated (and thus have people fall back on their general understanding of what it means) or made more detailed. The current definition captures some cases in line with most people's intuition, but not others, and I'm not sure whether the distinction could be easily set out in words. In the present case, although a different viewing angle might change my mind, I don't think the officials erred in not flagging this.

I'd also consider broadening the rule to encompass other efforts to go over erect opponents, including diving head first, inasmuch as there may be dangers there that are unjustified leaving in the game as distinct from those of hurdling per se.