Another HUGE ref blunder: punter suffers broken jaw, may have broken neck

[Tunescribe]

This hit was as malicious as anything we've seen this year -- broken jaw and freaking broken neck. And it wasn't flagged.

Bengals punter may have broken neck, refs may have to explain another blunder - NFL - Sporting News

 

[juny]

I saw the hit, while vicious and un-neccissary it was clean.

i read on some officating twitter feeds that it wasn't, punters are protected, and a fine is coming

 

[Tunescribe]

I saw the hit, while vicious and un-neccissary it was clean.

It was unnecessarily high and I believe there was helmet-to-helmet contact. And I think "intent" is fair game here. He wasn't simply trying to block the guy, he saw an opportunity to lay out a smaller, defenseless opponent and did so. It was the punter for crap sakes. He could've just stood there and yelled "boo" at him.

 

[Kontradiction]

Weren't the rules changes supposed to take hits like this out of the game? Oh they didn't? Oh and guys are also suffering shredded ACL's from other DB's actually trying to adhere to them and avoid fines?

Great job, Mr. Goodell. You're really killing it up there! :rocker::bricks:

 

[chasa]

I was watching the game and whoever was doing the game commented on the hit. He said that usually the opposing player will give the kicker a break in that situation and not lay a vicious lick on him, But that the kicker is fair game, maybe Goodell has changed the rules. Ive seen hits like this before on kickers without it being called.

it was not a clean hit, the defender lead with his helmet into a defenseless punter, thats like laying out a QB on an Int return, its going to be a multiple thousand dollar fine.

 

[Froob]

If the punter can tackle people how is he defenseless? Looks like it should be a dirty hit because of helmet to helmet when it wasn't needed.

 

[Patsrock]

It was a helmet to helmet hit and punters are not fair game. They are protected like QB's. Can't go high like that on a punter. Should have been a flag

 

[Tunescribe]

I was watching the game and whoever was doing the game commented on the hit. He said that usually the opposing player will give the kicker a break in that situation and not lay a vicious lick on him, But that the kicker is fair game, maybe Goodell has changed the rules. Ive seen hits like this before on kickers without it being called.

Again, the hit was a high blindside to the head/neck. Nobody is saying that punters and kickers can't be blocked, but there's a difference between blocking someone and trying to take them out.

 

[Rob0729]

I saw the hit, while vicious and un-neccissary it was clean.

I don't think it was a clean hit. I don't think you can't lead with your helmet like that.

 

[reflexblue]

It was unnecessarily high and I believe there was helmet-to-helmet contact. And I think "intent" is fair game here. He wasn't simply trying to block the guy, he saw an opportunity to lay out a smaller, defenseless opponent and did so. It was the punter for crap sakes. He could've just stood there and yelled "boo" at him.

After watching the play in slow mo i was wrong, the punter did take a helmut to the jaw/head. But when did punters and kickers become defenseless players? They can tackle just like everybody else on the field.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Not calling PI in the EZ against the Ravens last night was a 4 Pt swing that affected the outcome of the game. The NFL with it's "rule explicitly says X vs we call !X half the time" is making the NFL like the NBA. I gave up watching the NBA.

 

[SacPete1]

This thread is indicative of what is happening with rules, calls and then subsequent analysis.

The rules aren't clear to everyone (myself included) because definitions aren't clear. I've seen reference to a "defenseless player" and the term "unnecessary". What exactly do these mean? Was the punter defenseless because he didn't see him coming? Was the hit unnecessarily too hard? These terms need clearer definitions and practical examples.

What makes it worse is when the game analysts don't know what the rules are and then they judge the call. For the sake of the fan watching, they should at least know what the rules are before stating what should have or should not have been a penalty without knowing the rule.

Last night's game showed a pretty obvious PI in the endzone that wasn't called but was critical to the outcome. Why can't this play be subject to challenge? I don't buy for one second the argument that it will slow the game down or that coaches will be challenging everything in sight. Give them 2 challenges and that's it. How they use them is up to them.

And the review of the play has to be done from an office like how the NHL does it. The reason for this is that each referee still uses his own criteria when going under the hood and although the differences may be small, they are significant enough to result in different opinions and decisions.
Having one office review speeds up the review process (in theory), results in a more uniform set of criteria.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

For whatever reason, the league is helping the ravens as much as possible....last night's officiating confirmed it.

 

[Kontradiction]

For whatever reason, the league is helping the ravens as much as possible....last night's officiating confirmed it.

You sound like opposing fans when the Patriots win. When we were gifted a PI a couple of weeks ago, did you think that the refs were doing everything they could to help the Pats? Further, WHY would the league help the Ravens? It's not like they command a powerhouse viewership. So what reason could the league have to try to cheat them into the playoffs?

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

For whatever reason, the league is helping the ravens as much as possible....last night's officiating confirmed it.

Megatron dropping a few passes also contributed..What's up with that???
---------------------
http://nflcommunications.com/2011/12/27/definition-of-a-defenseless-player/
The following is taken from the 2011 NFL Rule Book (pages 73-74) and defines players who are in a defenseless posture. The material is also covered in the 2011 League Policies for Players Manual, distributed to all players in training camp.
It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;
(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;
(3) A runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped;
(4) A kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air;
(5) A player on the ground at the end of a play;
(6) A kicker/punter during the kick or during the return;

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

After watching the play in slow mo i was wrong, the punter did take a helmut to the jaw/head. But when did punters and kickers become defenseless players? They can tackle just like everybody else on the field.

The real question is with what we know about head injuries, as well as the dangers presented to the player on the receiving end, why the hell is it legal to ever drop your head before contact... The game is dangerous/violent enough without letting players use their heads as battering rams.

 

[Kontradiction]

Megatron dropping a few passes also contributed..What's up with that???

I think the officials put grease on his gloves prior to the game. You know, just to help the Ravens out because the NFL is so fixed and all.

 

[Tunescribe]

This thread is indicative of what is happening with rules, calls and then subsequent analysis.

The rules aren't clear to everyone (myself included) because definitions aren't clear. I've seen reference to a "defenseless player" and the term "unnecessary". What exactly do these mean? Was the punter defenseless because he didn't see him coming? Was the hit unnecessarily too hard? These terms need clearer definitions and practical examples.

Once you've followed the game long enough these things become second nature. It was a high blindside hit with helmet-to-helmet contact on a punter. The refs missed it.

 

[Observer]

Weren't the rules changes supposed to take hits like this out of the game? Oh they didn't? Oh and guys are also suffering shredded ACL's from other DB's actually trying to adhere to them and avoid fines?

Great job, Mr. Goodell. You're really killing it up there! :rocker::bricks:

NFL's idea for making it safer is good but their approach to actually accomplishing it is terrible. Fines that come after the game are over are a terrible way of policing on field incidents because then it becomes something that is extraneous to the game being played and not really part of playing rules. You have to make it so that safe play is part of the core rules of the game.

If somebody commits foul play that is injurious to a player, the proper way to handle it is:
1. Eject the player from the game
2. If it was particularly egregious, suspend the player from future games.

 

[Zeus]

Steelers linebacker is way too proud of injuring punter | For The Win