No fine for Clark for hit on Welker

[Leave No Doubt]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Sorry if this is a dumb question but who reviews the film once it's submitted to the league? I'm sure Rojets Goodell has the final say and all, but who actually makes the initial recomendations? And, godhelpus, does anyone look back and see how they've ruled on previous hits, just for the sake of comparison/consistency? Mind blowing how seemingly subjective and inconsistent the league is allowed to be

 

[363839]

Re: No Fine For Clark

I was on a blog that is not a NE fan sight.
Blogger states in an entry along with youtube clip of the hit that it wasn't even a penalty. I wrote in the comments section that it was not only a penalty but a $15,000 fine would be appropriate.
The thread was already a day a 2 old so I didn't get too many replies but the consensus for this blog, which has fans from all over the country, was that it was a clean hit.
I don't know. I still say that the linebacker put his head down before the ball even arrived and Wes was pretty much defenseless as he was not bracing himself for anything like that.
I still think he should have been fined. Judging how the NFL loves to bust NE's balls about seemingly lesser transgressions all the time.

 

[Yehoodi]

Re: No Fine For Clark

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.

thansk, i did find that out after doing some more research on the matter . . .

 

[WhiZa]

Re: No Fine For Clark

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.

You are correct. Clark jumped at him and led with his shoulder arms in. There was no tackling technique there. Now if the ball wasn't tipped, i guarantee Clark would of at least opened his arms and tried to wrap him up. He instead left his feet after the ball was tipped and the play was all but dead.

 

[WhiZa]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Does anyone have the video of Thomas's fined late hit?

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Two things I learned:

#1 Even though the refs that work under Pereira think launching is a penalty, their boss doesn't think so.

#2 Even though Goodell issued a memo about hitting defenseless receivers this season, his flunkie Pereira ignores the memos.

This is the same thing that happened last year with Spygate. Goodell issues a memo, the league officers such as Steve Alic said, "That's football," when presented with evidence of teams stealing signals off illegal tape.

Belichick thought, "Oh, so this is just a memo that we can ignore since there's no rule in the rulebook."

Clearly, the NFL is setting someone up here, since they probably expect Belichick to tell his players to hit receivers hard as long as the football hasn't hit the ground.

 

[Cartwright]

Re: No Fine For Clark

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.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I thought the hit was unnecessary, but by strict interpretation, looked like a legal hit. I contend the guy could have backed off, but the play was close enough that the NFL could not reasonably fault him for following through.

Stop whining about that game. Pats have won squat fair and square, and you are going to rail about that? Be happy with the 3 in 4 and be quiet

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Hey, don't get me wrong, I thought the hit was unnecessary, but by strict interpretation, looked like a legal hit. I contend the guy could have backed off, but the play was close enough that the NFL could not reasonably fault him for following through.

Stop whining about that game. Pats have won squat fair and square, and you are going to rail about that? Be happy with the 3 in 4 and be quiet

I personally don't care that the man didn't get fined, although I do think the uneven application of the fining system is yet another aspect of the CBA that the players' union should be adamant about fixing. However, the hit was illegal by both definition and the interpretation given during training camp. Also, most people aren't whining about the game except to say that the Patriots stunk in the second half. As a final note, there are multiple Colts boards available to you if you don't like it around here.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Two things I learned:

#1 Even though the refs that work under Pereira think launching is a penalty, their boss doesn't think so.

#2 Even though Goodell issued a memo about hitting defenseless receivers this season, his flunkie Pereira ignores the memos.

This is the same thing that happened last year with Spygate. Goodell issues a memo, the league officers such as Steve Alic said, "That's football," when presented with evidence of teams stealing signals off illegal tape.

Belichick thought, "Oh, so this is just a memo that we can ignore since there's no rule in the rulebook."

Clearly, the NFL is setting someone up here, since they probably expect Belichick to tell his players to hit receivers hard as long as the football hasn't hit the ground.

heh.........talk about flying off the handle

“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.

so unless you can find something in a rule book, you are incorrect in your assessment

 

[stavros27]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Honestly, I don't know what everyone seems to be seeing in this hit. Is it because Welker got popped hard? You need to set your bias aside for a second. In real time, Clark was seeing the ball coming to Welker, and was going to hit him. He was already going towards him, already ready to make a play.

The ball got just before it got to Welker and Clark was already making his move to make the play. You can complain and watch microsecond replays all you want, but in real time there is no way Clark could have avoided making the hit. He made a great play and shouldn't have been penalized, and rightfully wasn't fined.

If Harrison makes that same exact play, you guys know without a doubt how up in arms this forum would be over him being penalized for doing it. Slow motion Instant replays seem to be affecting our views in a bad, bad way.

 

[Metaphors]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Hey, don't get me wrong, I thought the hit was unnecessary, but by strict interpretation, looked like a legal hit. I contend the guy could have backed off, but the play was close enough that the NFL could not reasonably fault him for following through.

Legal by strict interpretation of what exactly? Couple of points:

1) The fact that the ball was tipped would only be important if the call was pass interference. The fact that the ball was touched is meaningless otherwise.

2) The call was unnecessary roughness, further clarified to be on a defenseless receiver. That is a judgement call and it was the judgement of the official (and you agree above) that the hit was unnecessary. There really isn't anything else to interpret, strictly or otherwise. Quarterbacks and defenseless receivers have been afforded special protections in the rules for years.

3) As for the fine, there are a multitude of examples of unnecessary roughness penalties that have been fined over the years. I even posted a John Lynch hit that was equally or less egregious and got him fined $7500. Clark was called for a penalty that could have resulted in serious injury to Welker. If that isn't the criteria for a fine, I'm not sure what is.

My take is that this situation is the result of 2 convergent forces: the commissioner being criticized for being too soft on the Pats and for being a ***** when assessing fines for violent hits. Goodell needs to grow a pair and stop worrying about what the media and fans think of him.

 

[jays52]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Personally, I think that the hit was both uncalled for and dirty. There's a difference between seperating a reciever from the ball and laying a guy out too hard. As much as I think the NFL is becoming a ***** league (thanks Polian!) there is an unspoken rule with football players. There's a line between a good pop and intent to injure. You always try to knock a guy in the mouth, you never try to hurt them. There are situations in the game where you have a guy on a crossing route and you have him lined up. This is like a free lane to the QB, your eyes just light up. You only get the chance for a highlight hit once or twice a game, so it's tough to lay off. However, a bigger statement is made by simply leading with your shoulder and stiffening your body up. It's not a brutal hit and won't injure the opponent, but your point is made and the guy knows you held back.

A shot like that on a reciever away from the play is nothing but dirty. It's a play made out of frustration usually and also makes you a target out there. Good players make those hits on opponents when it is within the rules of the game. Bad players make hits like that after the play and call themselves hitters. It's a bush league punk move and frankly I'm shoked he wasn't fined.

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Honestly, I don't know what everyone seems to be seeing in this hit. Is it because Welker got popped hard? You need to set your bias aside for a second. In real time, Clark was seeing the ball coming to Welker, and was going to hit him. He was already going towards him, already ready to make a play.

The ball got just before it got to Welker and Clark was already making his move to make the play. You can complain and watch microsecond replays all you want, but in real time there is no way Clark could have avoided making the hit. He made a great play and shouldn't have been penalized, and rightfully wasn't fined.

If Harrison makes that same exact play, you guys know without a doubt how up in arms this forum would be over him being penalized for doing it. Slow motion Instant replays seem to be affecting our views in a bad, bad way.

When Kenny Phillips hit Mewelde Moore on a pass play early this year, and got penalized, the entire Steelers' board was crying their eyes out. Please, save us the lecture.

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Hey, don't get me wrong, I thought the hit was unnecessary, but by strict interpretation, looked like a legal hit. I contend the guy could have backed off, but the play was close enough that the NFL could not reasonably fault him for following through.

Stop whining about that game. Pats have won squat fair and square, and you are going to rail about that? Be happy with the 3 in 4 and be quiet

What strict interpretation are you talking about?

Did you see the link I provided from D McAulay?

(We don't trust Periera around here because of his comments in the past Asante Samuel and Ellis Hobbs).

 

[Theplayer]

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!

Why is it legal to hit a WR who hasn't touched the ball? Someone please explain this to me. Why is a tipped ball ruled differently? What if a WR is 30 yards from the tipped ball..can a defensive back just drill him in that situation?...how about 15 yards away?...10?...5? what's the rule?

 

[Cartwright]

Re: No Fine For Clark

What strict interpretation are you talking about?

Did you see the link I provided from D McAulay?

(We don't trust Periera around here because of his comments in the past Asante Samuel and Ellis Hobbs).

Didn't see the link, but I am saying he didn't lead with his helmet, there was no helmet to helmet, and there was no forearm/shoulder to helmet or neck. I hesitate to call Welker "defenseless". It's not like he had taken a flying leap and was airborne. At some point when you run, both feet can be off the ground, but it is not like you are defenseless. Ward smacks DBs ALL THE TIME when they are not looking, after a pick. Basically, Welker got blindsided, but there is no real rule against blindsiding a player. I don't think that and "defenseless" are defined as one and the same. Welker got up preet damn quickly. Had the hit truely been illegal, with that type of body snap, he might still be "coming to". I think it was just a hard, abrupt, shocking hit, but breaking ot down, not sure it deserves a fine. Like I said, I think Clark COULD have backed down on the force with which he leveled the blow, but that is a slippery precedent you might set.

Like I said, Dallas Clark took a similar, vicious hit last year by a Buc, but I don't think the player got fined.

 

[upstater1]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Didn't see the link, but I am saying he didn't lead with his helmet, there was no helmet to helmet, and there was no forearm/shoulder to helmet or neck. I hesitate to call Welker "defenseless". It's not like he had taken a flying leap and was airborne. At some point when you run, both feet can be off the ground, but it is not like you are defenseless. Ward smacks DBs ALL THE TIME when they are not looking, after a pick. Basically, Welker got blindsided, but there is no real rule against blindsiding a player. I don't think that and "defenseless" are defined as one and the same. Welker got up preet damn quickly. Had the hit truely been illegal, with that type of body snap, he might still be "coming to". I think it was just a hard, abrupt, shocking hit, but breaking ot down, not sure it deserves a fine. Like I said, I think Clark COULD have backed down on the force with which he leveled the blow, but that is a slippery precedent you might set.

Like I said, Dallas Clark took a similar, vicious hit last year by a Buc, but I don't think the player got fined.

The link was to the NFL rule that says you can not leave your feet and hit a receiver. It's called launching, and despite what Perira says, the supervisor of referees described it well. It has nothing to do with helmet-to-helmet.

It’s late in the afternoon practice Friday and San Diego quarterback Drew Brees throws a slant pass to rookie receiver Kassim Osgood. But just as the pass reaches Osgood’s hands, defensive back Drayton Florence charges into the play and lunges at his teammate.

According to referee Terry McAulay, if Florence leaves his feet to make the same type of play during the regular season, he will pick up a 15-yard personal foul penalty because the NFL has done a better job of defining what is an illegal hit and what’s not.

“It doesn’t even have to be a helmet-to-helmet hit,” said McAulay at the Chargers’ training camp at the Home Depot Center in Carson.

“Launching with a shoulder would be a foul too. The key is, you can’t launch at anyone that is defenseless, usually meaning receivers and quarterbacks. When you jump in the air and launch yourself into a hit, that’s a foul.”

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

 

[stavros27]

Re: No Fine For Clark

When Kenny Phillips hit Mewelde Moore on a pass play early this year, and got penalized, the entire Steelers' board was crying their eyes out. Please, save us the lecture.

So you're saying..."see, they did it too, mom! So it's okay for us to do the same thing"? There are always biased fans who are going to back their team and bash anything that goes against their team whether right or wrong. Frankly, they are annoying, regardless of if they are Pats fans, Steelers, fans, or even Seahawks fans.

 

[ALP]

Re: No Fine For Clark

Personally, I think that the hit was both uncalled for and dirty. There's a difference between seperating a reciever from the ball and laying a guy out too hard. As much as I think the NFL is becoming a ***** league (thanks Polian!) there is an unspoken rule with football players. There's a line between a good pop and intent to injure. You always try to knock a guy in the mouth, you never try to hurt them. There are situations in the game where you have a guy on a crossing route and you have him lined up. This is like a free lane to the QB, your eyes just light up. You only get the chance for a highlight hit once or twice a game, so it's tough to lay off. However, a bigger statement is made by simply leading with your shoulder and stiffening your body up. It's not a brutal hit and won't injure the opponent, but your point is made and the guy knows you held back.

A shot like that on a reciever away from the play is nothing but dirty. It's a play made out of frustration usually and also makes you a target out there. Good players make those hits on opponents when it is within the rules of the game. Bad players make hits like that after the play and call themselves hitters. It's a bush league punk move and frankly I'm shoked he wasn't fined.

nicely written

man i hate that the pats players are treated differently...especially in this scenario, when it invloves livelihoods and injuries and player's bodies

 

[juny]

Apparently Wes is OK with hit, and sounds like he should be playing on Sunday.

Welker not upset with hard hit by Steelers safety - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

I'm fine with the hit as it is old-school football. But with the league recently cracking down on "excessive" hits and trying to prevent injuries, I'm surprised there is no fine for that hit on Welker.