Ring 6
PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
2021 Weekly Picks Winner
2022 Weekly Picks Winner
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 63,761
- Reaction score
- 14,113
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.What wasn't demonstrated? The exact rule was posted in this thread.
Neck area is in the rule. Define that however you wish, but I find it hard to accept that 'neck area' would not include the body part that is directly adjacent to it.
You have to either decide that for some reason they wrote neck area to only mean the neck, or that they meant to include what is connected to the neck, which is where the hit was.
Again, I hate the rule, but it is the rule.
shoulder to shoulder hit is not illegal
I thought that today before someone showed me the rule to show me that in this case it actually is.shoulder to shoulder hit is not illegal
so the conclusion is that it was the wrong call
whatever that means...next thing you know, pass catchers will learn to bobble the ball all the way down the field to be deemed 'defenseless' not the defenders fault he could not secure the ball in a timely manner
bad call ... case closed
The penalties targeting the head worked.
Isn't that why replay would be crucial here?
How about big Vince hauling ass downfield trying to get McCourty into the endzone on the first GIF. Gotta say I was completely wrong on #75. Thought he was done but he seems to be getting better and better each week. Great season for Vince.
I agree it was a clean hit.
I agree the rules say it was a penalty.
I thought that today before someone showed me the rule to show me that in this case it actually is.
The rules current say the hit is illegal, unless you consider a few inches from the head to not be the 'neck area' which would be hard to argue.I hold almost exactly the opposite view. I think certain angles on the replay show clearly that it was a legal hit under the rules, by a few inches. But given how Green's head was whipped by the hit, I could be OK with a rule change making such hits illegal.
because it's the shoulder area?
otherwise, every shoulder to shoulder hit is illegal and we know that is not true
Okay, for the folks who are saying it definitely was or wasn't a penalty, watch this (someone computer-smart can embed):
http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos...ers-concussion-nasty-hit-rodney-mcleod/30903/
This was NOT called a penalty, and the NFL guy said it SHOULDN'T have been called a penalty. how do you make a distinction? How does a ref on the field make a distinction? in short, they don't - and the arbitrariness of the refereeing is ruining the game. Bad enough when it was "you can call holding on every down!" but now these are game-changers on PI, Roughing the Passer, hitting a receiver, etc.
No. Only shoulder to shoulder, or neck area, hits on DEFENSELESS players.
Looking at that gif, there's no flag in view at all so it must have been thrown very late.
I'm pretty certain that WAS called a penalty.
Okay, for the folks who are saying it definitely was or wasn't a penalty, watch this (someone computer-smart can embed):
http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos...ers-concussion-nasty-hit-rodney-mcleod/30903/
This was NOT called a penalty, and the NFL guy said it SHOULDN'T have been called a penalty. how do you make a distinction? How does a ref on the field make a distinction? in short, they don't - and the arbitrariness of the refereeing is ruining the game. Bad enough when it was "you can call holding on every down!" but now these are game-changers on PI, Roughing the Passer, hitting a receiver, etc.