Browner's penalty negating McCourty TD

[IllegalContact]

Just so I understand, this is what your comments amount to.

1) In order to avoid injuries to a player who is distracted from the oncoming hit because he is focussing on the pass coming his way, the league considers him defenseless, and you cannot hit him in the head or neck area.
2) A player who can be prepared for the hit is not defenseless.
3) The offensive player is responsible for knowing the hit is coming while he is trying to catch the ball, and therefore has to choose between the ball and bracing himself for a hit to the head or neck, because the defender has every right to hit him in the head and neck so the receiver should be smart enough to forget about the football and choose to protect himself, because we wrote this rule to protect the receiver, but decided that we really don't want to.

what does any of this have to do with the price of beans? It's not stipulated anywhere in the rules.....football players have the ability to use judgement.......there is no stipulation protecting a player bobbling the ball

 

[Onedaful]

You are kidding right?
The exact reason for a defenseless receiver rule is that while the receiver is trying to catch the ball he is defenseless.
Are you really saying that the NFL wants a receiver to decide whether to catch the ball or ignore it and brace for the hit thats about to come?
Why would there be a defenseless receiver rule if the receiver is responsible for defending himself instead of catching the pass?

Why are you adamant on taking that choice away from the receiver?

 

[Kontradiction]

Doubt of what? He was stretched out to catch a ball in traffic. In the NFL that's defenseless, it's textbook.

Do you think the NFL is going to overturn this because you don't like, or don't understand the penalty?

He was stretched out? No he wasn't. No wonder you think this is a blow to the neck area. You either haven't watched the GIF or have chosen to selectively ignore what happens in it to fit your narrative. Browner did what Browner was supposed to: he separated receiver from ball using a clean hit. The receiver's eyes dropped in the process to see Browner coming. If DB's are going to get flagged for hits like this, at least make it worth it. Go helmet to helmet. **** the receiver up and make sure he leaves the game. Earn the flag and fine.

 

[IllegalContact]

And when he is catching a pass he cannot be prepared.

he wasn't catching a pass....he was bobbling it

 

[IllegalContact]

Why are you adamant on taking that choice away from the receiver?

he painted himself into a corner a long time ago

 

[doesntmatter1]

New idea. Every time a wr gets laid out, the qb should be heavily fined. Then they would stop throwing them(manning).

 

[Ring 6]

he wasn't catching a pass....he was bobbling it

But the rule says ATTEMPTING to catch a pass, so clearly he was.

Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. 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;
(6) A kicker/punter during the kick or during the return (Also see Article 6(g) for additional restrictions against a kicker/punter);
(7) A quarterback at any time after a change of possession (Also see Article 8(f) for additional restrictions against a quarterback after a change of possession);
(8) A player who receives a ―blindside block when the offensive blocker is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and approaches the opponent from behind or from the side, and
(9) A player who is protected from an illegal crackback block (see Article 2);
(10) The offensive player who attempts a snap during a Field Goal attempt or a Try Kick.

 

[Ring 6]

Why are you adamant on taking that choice away from the receiver?

Seriously?
You think that the receiver should have to choose whether to try to catch a pass or get hit in the head?
Again, what you suggest is that there is never a defenseless receiver. Think about it. Based on your interpretation when would a receiver be defenseless? Why did they write the rule?

 

[Onedaful]

Seriously?
You think that the receiver should have to choose whether to try to catch a pass or get hit in the head?
Again, what you suggest is that there is never a defenseless receiver. Think about it. Based on your interpretation when would a receiver be defenseless? Why did they write the rule?

My interpretation is based on the writing.As others have brought up, the rule is poorly written in the fact that it is not easily defined when a receiver can impede or avoid impact. I don't know why, according to you, a receiver can't make a judgement call, if according to the rule, he can protect himself adequately before impact.

 

[Ring 6]

2)A player who can be prepared for the hit is not defenseless.

That is literally what the rule says.

No it is not literally what the rule says.
The rule says:

If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;

note that is says receiver/runner and specifies that he is capable of avoiding or warding off the contact.
Please explain to me how Green could have avoided or warded off the contact, you know the hit he never saw coming.

 

[1960Pats]

And with that, I am done. I can't believe this is even a discussion.
I guess losing a TD clouds vision.

I don't know how you got through it. I read all of the posts but only responded to a few. Bless you for trying.

 

[Ring 6]

My interpretation is based on the writing.As others have brought up, the rule is poorly written in the fact that it is not easily defined when a receiver can impede or avoid impact. I don't know why, according to you, a receiver can't make a judgement call, if according to the rule, he can protect himself adequately before impact.

Because the exact purpose of the rule is that a receiver trying to make a catch is exposed, vulnerable and defenseless.
If they wanted him to choose, they would write a rule saying hits to the head and neck of a receiver catching a pass are allowable if the receiver could have chosen to ignore the pass.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't know how you got through it. I read all of the posts but only responded to a few. Bless you for trying.

Yeah, truly I'm not through. They keep sucking me back in.

 

[Ring 6]

My interpretation is based on the writing.As others have brought up, the rule is poorly written in the fact that it is not easily defined when a receiver can impede or avoid impact. I don't know why, according to you, a receiver can't make a judgement call, if according to the rule, he can protect himself adequately before impact.

Based on what writing?
You just posted something that isn't in the rule and called it "literally what the rule says"
How can your opinion be on what is written if you don't even know what is written?

 

[RayClay]

He was stretched out? No he wasn't. No wonder you think this is a blow to the neck area. You either haven't watched the GIF or have chosen to selectively ignore what happens in it to fit your narrative. Browner did what Browner was supposed to: he separated receiver from ball using a clean hit. The receiver's eyes dropped in the process to see Browner coming. If DB's are going to get flagged for hits like this, at least make it worth it. Go helmet to helmet. **** the receiver up and make sure he leaves the game. Earn the flag and fine.

If this happened the same way tomorrow, it would be called the same. I don't make the rules.

I don't interpret the rules. apparently the people who do think that is a penalty. I haven't heard otherwise.

 

[RayClay]

My interpretation is based on the writing.As others have brought up, the rule is poorly written in the fact that it is not easily defined when a receiver can impede or avoid impact. I don't know why, according to you, a receiver can't make a judgement call, if according to the rule, he can protect himself adequately before impact.

You might want to call the league office and give them your interpretation.

 

[Onedaful]

Based on what writing?
You just posted something that isn't in the rule and called it "literally what the rule says"
How can your opinion be on what is written if you don't even know what is written?

So if a players can be prepared for a hit, your logic states he shouldn't protect himself?

 

[Ring 6]

what does any of this have to do with the price of beans? It's not stipulated anywhere in the rules.....football players have the ability to use judgement.......there is no stipulation protecting a player bobbling the ball

Of course there is, it has been posted in this thread many times.
A receiver ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A CATCH is judged as defenseless.
This results in one sole consequence. If the defender chooses to hit him in the head and neck area with his shoulder or forearm, a penalty will result.

 

[Kontradiction]

If this happened the same way tomorrow, it would be called the same. I don't make the rules.

I don't interpret the rules. apparently the people who do think that is a penalty. I haven't heard otherwise.

I've heard otherwise all over the place. Belichick, Rodney, Amani Toomer, Bob Papa, and almost every single other host on Sirius XM from the Opening Kickoff to Late Hits have all said this was a clean hit. And those are all people that are just coming off the top of my head. I understand that you don't make the rules, just try to understand them and what you're looking at. For one, that wasn't a helmet to helmet hit (as was called on the field). For another, it wasn't a dirty hit. That was clean shoulder to shoulder contact to separate receiver from ball and, if called properly, was a beautiful play that would have led to a turnover and a TD. So if you and the other putz that I have on ignore that just disliked my last post wish to dig your heels in on this one (sort of like the Bengals punter that got lit up last year), have fun. But there was nothing wrong with this hit and refs **** the bed on the field.

 

[IllegalContact]

Well, at least we're clear on the anatomy.

It's a football game. Is job is to catch the football. He's trying to catch the ball, not trying to juggle it. I do not understand your point at all.

so let me get this straight.....he gets a perfect pass but can't make the clean catch.....why is that on the defense? no that there is an actual point because he had 4 steps to avoid/ward.....he chose to stay with the ball for way too long and failed to brace himself....he had plenty of time....he just chose to ignore the inevitable.....

how long should they give him? his career would be over if browner chose to go lower.....at the moment of contact, green's right leg would have done a joe theismann