Bengals' Vontaze Burfict facing 5-game suspension

[Richard Camembert]

Vontaze Burfict suspension: Here's the hit and why it's illegal under new NFL rule

So Sherman, the RB, was considered defenseless through his route by rule; Burfict clearly did not know that (nor did I), as he only talks about not going too high on Sherman.

 

[Wheelman]

Vontaze Burfict suspension: Here's the hit and why it's illegal under new NFL rule
So Sherman, the RB, was considered defenseless through his route by rule; Burfict clearly did not know that (nor did I), as he only talks about not going too high on Sherman.

Man that rule is such BS! Sherman was going in diagonally towards the hit area as Burfict was going straight forward to the hit area. I mean come on! That's such BS! There's going to be too much debate whether it was side to side or not like this one. What a bad rule!

 

[Froob]

I thought four games was long enough to make up for any sin aside from domestic violence?

 

[Ring 6]

Vontaze Burfict suspension: Here's the hit and why it's illegal under new NFL rule
So Sherman, the RB, was considered defenseless through his route by rule; Burfict clearly did not know that (nor did I), as he only talks about not going too high on Sherman.

I think the writer misunderstands the rule.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Burflict is exactly the kind of player article 46 was made to deal with.

If there were Patriot Commandments, #9 would be
"You shall not bear false witness against your players by invoking article 46"

 

[Richard Camembert]

I think the writer misunderstands the rule.

That may be, but then I don't know why the league is suspending Burfict otherwise, as there is no competing theory that I can find (I don't think the league is just burying him because he's a thug (after all, they haven't done that to TJ Ward nor did they bury Bernard Pollard)). Maybe they think Burfict went up too high.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I thought the hit looked legal as well. Then I was in my car this afternoon and turned on the radio. I think it was Fox Sports/ Doug Gottlieb.

Anyway, the host said that this play was not a penalty in the past but it is now because of a new "point of emphasis" that established that you no longer get a free shot at a receiver within 5 yards of the LOS, if the pass has already been thrown and it was not thrown in your area.

That is the first I have heard of this, and frankly it doesn't make a lot of sense to me that you are asking the defensive player to be aware of exactly when and in what direction the QB released the ball.

But... that was his explanation. News to me.

Has anyone else heard of this point-of-emphasis change?

 

[Ring 6]

That may be, but then I don't know why the league is suspending Burfict otherwise, as there is no competing theory that I can find (I don't think the league is just burying him because he's a thug (after all, they haven't done that to TJ Ward nor did they bury Bernard Pollard)). Maybe they think Burfict went up too high.

We'll first the league over penalizes hits. Hits that look violent or hits where players are injured get fines even when they are legal.

But in this case the rule says the hit must be from behind or the side AND in the head and neck area.
The writer misunderstands that it is both not just either and also does not recognize neither exist.

 

[Ring 6]

I thought the hit looked legal as well. Then I was in my car this afternoon and turned on the radio. I think it was Fox Sports/ Doug Gottlieb.

Anyway, the host said that this play was not a penalty in the past but it is now because of a new "point of emphasis" that established that you no longer get a free shot at a receiver within 5 yards of the LOS, if the pass has already been thrown and it was not thrown in your area.

That is the first I have heard of this, and frankly it doesn't make a lot of sense to me that you are asking the defensive player to be aware of exactly when and in what direction the QB released the ball.

But... that was his explanation. News to me.

Has anyone else heard of this point-of-emphasis change?

Have to be careful using guys like Doug gotlieb as an authority. Especially regarding football because he is not a football guy. He is telling you what he heard someone say, or what he thinks he heard. It's like the telephone game

 

[captain stone]

Did you see the hit? What do you think is wrong with it?

Burfict saw the QB throw the pass;

Burfict knew that the pass was intended for somebody else, much farther downfield;

Burfict THEN hits the FB coming across the middle, instead of turning around to follow the flight of the ball, in case of a fumble or deflection.

Typical selfish, cheap, dirty hit by a meathead in a football career full of them.

 

[Ring 6]

Burfict saw the QB throw the pass;

You don't know that. There is no way to tell if he is looking at the QB or his receiver and it is much more likely he is looking at the receiver he is about to hit

Burfict knew that the pass was intended for somebody else, much farther downfield;

Burfict THEN hits the FB coming across the middle, instead of turning around to follow the flight of the ball, in case of a fumble or deflection.

Typical selfish, cheap, dirty hit by a meathead in a football career full of them.

This hit was legal. What he did before has nothing to do with that.

 

[captain stone]

Burfict was looking right at the QB.

 

[Ring 6]

Burfict was looking right at the QB.

Umm no he isn't he is looking at the guy he is covering who is in the legal chuck zone.

 

[patfanken]

Burfect has had a dozen unnecessary or illegal hits in his career. This one dosen't appear to be one of them. When I saw the clip I couldn't get the image of Willie Mcginest or Mike Vrabel doing the exact same thing multiple times in the past and having US cheering them for it.

You might be able to parse the so called rules and "points of emphasis" to say it was illegal. But anyone who has actually played LB knows you don't always know when and where the QB is throwing the ball, but you DO know when a potential receiver is coming into your AOR and what the defense calls for you to do in that situation.

There have been times when I wonder why this guy hasn't been suspended more often but if THIS was illegal, then I'm at a loss of trying to figure out exactly what IS legal anymore.

 

[DaBronxPats14]

He should've messed with air pressure in footballs even though there is no proof, went through owners* witch hunt conspiracy set up, crush his cell phone and fought judge jury executioner goodell* and he would have gotten only 4 games.


Or get a fall guy
- Chris Carter

 

[luuked]

Burfect has had a dozen unnecessary or illegal hits in his career. This one dosen't appear to be one of them. When I saw the clip I couldn't get the image of Willie Mcginest or Mike Vrabel doing the exact same thing multiple times in the past and having US cheering them for it.

You might be able to parse the so called rules and "points of emphasis" to say it was illegal. But anyone who has actually played LB knows you don't always know when and where the QB is throwing the ball, but you DO know when a potential receiver is coming into your AOR and what the defense calls for you to do in that situation.

There have been times when I wonder why this guy hasn't been suspended more often but if THIS was illegal, then I'm at a loss of trying to figure out exactly what IS legal anymore.

See the only reason I have a problem with the entire situation is because of exactly this. Who knows what is legal anymore.

The Burfict suspension I honestly dont care about. He has done enough egregious **** over his career and skated free that I dont see a moral issue if he gets banged on something like this. Given his history he will should be judged differently and given no benefit of the doubt anymore.

 

[patfanken]

See the only reason I have a problem with the entire situation is because of exactly this. Who knows what is legal anymor

The Burfict suspension I honestly dont care about. He has done enough egregious **** over his career and skated free that I dont see a moral issue if he gets banged on something like this. Given his history he will should be judged differently and given no benefit of the doubt anymore.

Yeah, you are right They could have picked several other plays Burfect has made to make a case. But here's the problem I have with this one. Forget about Burfect, but rather think about the wildly inconsistent manner this league administer's discipline to begin with. If this hit was worth 5 games then who is to say that for "whatever reasons" this league can ARBITRARILY create other "infractions" to suspend players that they wish?