No fine for Clark for hit on Welker

[Two Eight]

Re: No Fine For Clark

on one hand, it was an unneeded hit...........on the other hand, he probably knows the rule book better than any of you

if rodney harrison did that to marvin harrison, y'all would be cheering it

If Rodney Harrison did that to Marvin Harrison he would probably be suspended for it

 

[Cartwright]

Re: No Fine For Clark

If Rodney Harrison did that to Marvin Harrison he would probably be suspended for it

Well, they didn't suspend Marvin for dislocating Roidney's shoulder with his face mask

 

[PAPatsjunkie]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Broncos safety fined $7,500 by league (2004)

John Lynch Hits Dante Hall

Wow. Just wow.

 

[37Harrison]

Re: No Fine For Clark

OK, so the hit itself might not have been illegal according to the league. But the circumstances surrounding it are what bother me: It's clear that Clark's intention was to lay out Welker and not make a play on the ball. Isn't that a fine-able offense?

David Thomas would probably like his $7,500 back now.

Inconsistent doesn't even begin to describe the league offices.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

Re: No Fine For Clark

David Thomas would probably like his $7,500 back now.

Inconsistant doesn't even begin to describe the league offices.

Inconsistant explains a lot in the league this year.....the only constant is Roger "Jets" Goodell and the hatred he has for the patriots.....

 

[strongside]

Re: No Fine For Clark

A big reason for suspension/fines for plays like this is the results on the player involved. If Welker was carted off in a stretcher you can be sure as sh&t that there would be a fine/suspension.

 

[Mark Morse]

Re: No Fine For Clark

If the Boston Herald is the source, then it must be true! Why don't they just cite the National Enquierer!

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

I have said that before no surpises...it was not a Illegal Hit! I just hope one of our a Safety's could hit like Ryan Clark. The moral of a that none fine is the hit look pretty brutal in slow motion but not in real time or lets say with the naked eye. It was Excellent hit...i wish Ryan Clark had laid one on that Wus Ben Watson!

You're right, apparently.

But what do you think of the LINK I gave you a few days ago in which Periera said LAUNCHING AGAINST A DEFENSELESS WR is illegal?

Interesting, no?

He even cited the rule book.

Here, have a look: Vicious Tacklers Will Take Big Hit From NFL Officials - Los Angeles Times

Ref Terry McAulay disagrees with you and Periera.

Funny, but Eugene Wilson got penalized in the Super Bowl for this, and Pereira defended the penalty.

Also, we were told early in the season that the NFL was putting a point of emphasis on hitting defenseless receivers.

You know what I think happened? I think Pereira is a tool

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

on one hand, it was an unneeded hit...........on the other hand, he probably knows the rule book better than any of you

if rodney harrison did that to marvin harrison, y'all would be cheering it

Vicious Tacklers Will Take Big Hit From NFL Officials - Los Angeles Times

He knows the rule book better?

Are you sure?

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

A big reason for suspension/fines for plays like this is the results on the player involved. If Welker was carted off in a stretcher you can be sure as sh&t that there would be a fine/suspension.

What happened to the guy Thomas hit?

 

[Metaphors]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Wow. Just wow.

Seriously. There isn't a single reasonable person who can look at these 2 hits and subsequent comments and see any kind of consistency from the league office. To their credit, it seems like the officials got it right (and consistent) in both cases.

 

[okterrific]

Re: No Fine For Clark

David Thomas would probably like his $7,500 back now.

Inconsistent doesn't even begin to describe the league offices.

David Thomas hit a guy 5 seconds after the whistle blew and everyone was standing around. When Clark hit Welker, the ball (that was tipped) was still in the air.

As far as the Lynch hit, he's clearly leading with his helmet. The "officials" told him something else just like Hochuli told Clark something else. The league fines players, not referees.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: No Fine For Clark

I have said that before no surpises...it was not a Illegal Hit! I just hope one of our a Safety's could hit like Ryan Clark. The moral of a that none fine is the hit look pretty brutal in slow motion but not in real time or lets say with the naked eye. It was Excellent hit...i wish Ryan Clark had laid one on that Wus Ben Watson!

It was NOT a legal hit because Clark hit a defenseless receiver who had no chance to make a play on the ball AND Clark left his feet. While Clark did not hit helmet to helmet, the first two are enough to make it illegal.

It was NOT an excellent hit.

 

[Cartwright]

Re: No Fine For Clark

It was NOT a legal hit because Clark hit a defenseless receiver who had no chance to make a play on the ball AND Clark left his feet. While Clark did not hit helmet to helmet, the first two are enough to make it illegal.

It was NOT an excellent hit.

What don't yo uget about this?

“A lot of people think it’s a foul to leave your feet,” Pereira said. “Launching is not a foul. There is nothing in the rulebook that states that at all. It’s a misconception people have.

“It is a foul to hit with your helmet against a defenseless receiver. It is a foul to throw a forearm into the neck or head area of your opponent. I don’t think either of those things happened. I’m not a fan of those high hits but if you do it with your shoulder you’re OK.”

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: No Fine For Clark

What don't yo uget about this?

“A lot of people think it’s a foul to leave your feet,” Pereira said. “Launching is not a foul. There is nothing in the rulebook that states that at all. It’s a misconception people have.

“It is a foul to hit with your helmet against a defenseless receiver. It is a foul to throw a forearm into the neck or head area of your opponent. I don’t think either of those things happened. I’m not a fan of those high hits but if you do it with your shoulder you’re OK.”

What don't YOU and Pereira get about a DEFENSELESS RECEIVER period? What don't you two get about the fact that players have been penalized and FINED for "LAUNCHING" for years.

What Pereira "thinks" and what is reality are two different things. And he proved that on the BS call on Ellis Hobbs against Reggie Wayne when Pereira said that Hobbs hit Wayne, when, in reality, Hobbs never touched Wayne.

 

[Yehoodi]

Re: No Fine For Clark

David Thomas hit a guy 5 seconds after the whistle blew and everyone was standing around. When Clark hit Welker, the ball (that was tipped) was still in the air.

As far as the Lynch hit, he's clearly leading with his helmet. The "officials" told him something else just like Hochuli told Clark something else. The league fines players, not referees.

sry man get ur facts correct . . . there was no whistle on the play and Thomas hit Mathais (who by the way had just a moment before hit Moss as Green was going to the ground) a moment after he hit moss and Green was going to the ground . . .

 

[Yehoodi]

Re: No Fine For Clark

What don't yo uget about this?

“A lot of people think it’s a foul to leave your feet,” Pereira said. “Launching is not a foul. There is nothing in the rulebook that states that at all. It’s a misconception people have.

“It is a foul to hit with your helmet against a defenseless receiver. It is a foul to throw a forearm into the neck or head area of your opponent. I don’t think either of those things happened. I’m not a fan of those high hits but if you do it with your shoulder you’re OK.”

Mike Pereira needs to look at the rule book again because "leaping" is a foul in the nfl and warrants a 15 yard penatly and Clark did leap into Welker. I do not know where in the name of God Periera came up with his statements

here is a link to the NFL rule book

NFL Rules Digest: Summary of Penalties

 

[letekro]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Mike Pereira needs to look at the rule book again because "leaping" is a foul in the nfl and warrants a 15 yard penatly and Clark did leap into Welker. I do not know where in the name of God Periera came up with his statements

here is a link to the NFL rule book

NFL Rules Digest: Summary of Penalties

You're kidding, right?

Either the prohibition of "Leaping" is a vestige from early times or it has a specific meaning, which you have not uncovered. Clearly, "leaping," as the word is commonly understood, does not result in a penalty in the NFL.

 

[Yehoodi]

Re: No Fine For Clark

You're kidding, right?

Either the prohibition of "Leaping" is a vestige from early times or it has a specific meaning, which you have not uncovered. Clearly, "leaping," as the word is commonly understood, does not result in a penalty in the NFL.

hmm, then why is it in the rule book then?????

 

[BSR]

Re: No Fine For Clark

You're kidding, right?

Either the prohibition of "Leaping" is a vestige from early times or it has a specific meaning, which you have not uncovered. Clearly, "leaping," as the word is commonly understood, does not result in a penalty in the NFL.

Leaping is when you leap frog the lineman in front of you in order to block a field goal. It has nothing to do with tackling.

As for this hit. Yes, it should have been fined. There was nothing "clean" about it. Welker didn't have a play on the ball. You can't just level opposing players just because the ball is tipped.