NFL Rules- Hit on Brady Legal!

[Patters]

arrelbee, I would probably be dead if one those goes sat on me, let alone tackled me. But, what I thought on the replay of the Brady hit that I saw on tv, was that his upper body was moving through the air which softened the blow, and the arching of his back may have been a natural defensive reaction as much as something forced on him by the hit. I think if Brady really isn't hurt much, the hit looked worse than it was.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

That's why I put "hurt" in quotes - I certainly do think Brady was hurt on the play, but because he is tough and has the mentality that they are not going to take him out, he only sat out for one play. That he missed two days of practice this week is indicative that he was indeed hurt on the play. I also think you're right that if there is no fine for either the player or the coach, this will encourage more of the same.

So you did (put "hurt" in quotes). I missed it. NFL officiating is getting worse by the minute. Unless I see Ed Hochuli and his crew or a scant few other crews out there, I fear a lot of bad calls. Even some of the announcers are making fun of officiating. I think the most senior announcer of them all, Al Michaels is doing it too.

 

[psychoPat]

Once again the NFL is trying to cover up for its bad officiating and the obvious non-call by its field crew. Since noboby got "hurt" and the Pats won anyway, why call yourself out?

Headquarters continually demonstrates its determination
to whitewash some dreadful officiating.

This non-call is as egregious a mistake as the phony PI against Samuel
and Polamalu's interception in last year's playoffs.
It is simply impossible to justify.

That the NFL nonetheless steadfastly backs up such glaring errors
... is the main reason why i think that the league
probably "guides" its officials on which teams to favor and which to handicap.

P.S. The Patriots are not beneficiaries of this arrangement.

 

[zippo59]

I've seen the play dozens of times of times, and every time it looks like the crown of the helmet hits Brady square in the back first.

If that isn't spearing then what is?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

arrelbee, I would probably be dead if one those goes sat on me, let alone tackled me. But, what I thought on the replay of the Brady hit that I saw on tv, was that his upper body was moving through the air which softened the blow, and the arching of his back may have been a natural defensive reaction as much as something forced on him by the hit. I think if Brady really isn't hurt much, the hit looked worse than it was.

Having been hit and done a bit of hitting once upon a time, Brady's body is reacting to the impact - it's all involuntary. Like the chop-blocks I see being ignored, this was an illegal hit as I understand the rules. It was also a dangerous hit as I understand the physical dynamics - that the NFL chooses to white wash this is not unexpected, but it does bring into question their so-called concern about putting a quality product on the field.

 

[psychoPat]

How ironic that Vic Carucci, on nfl.com ... on the day this misguided idiocy came down ... in response to a related question said:
What do you think the chances are that the roughing-the-passer penalty will be altered during this offseason? .... -- Aaron, Hartford, Conn.

I'm sure the topic will receive some discussion by the members of the NFL's competition committee during the offseason. Clearly, there has been some inconsistency in the way such calls are made, and some defensive players have wound up costing their teams by not finishing sacks or hits on the quarterback for fear of drawing a 15-yard penalty.

However, I would not anticipate the penalty, itself, to be altered. Instead, I think the committee will focus on getting officials to be more consistent in determining what does and does not constitute roughing the quarterback. I support the general idea of officials being particularly conscious of protecting quarterbacks because they are much more vulnerable than other players on the field. .... I can't imagine any serious movement by the league that would have even the remote potential to compromise their safety.

This failure to discipline has more than "remote potential" to compromise QBs' safety - if the QB's initials are TB!
They've just about put a bounty on him. No protection for TB.

Can hardly wait to see what "action" Del Rio's spitefully incendiary words ...
inciting spearing ...
will evoke from the league.

http://nfl.com/news/story/9895100

 

[zippo59]

I find it so ironic that so often hits on QB's are called for penalties when they blatantly shouldn't be, and then now when there is a case of a hit on a QB that is questionable at the very least, nothing happens.

 

[Tunescribe]

I agree with the ruling. The helmet contact didn't appear intentional. These things just happen sometimes. If you watch the replay you can clearly see the defender bracing and positioning his shoulder for a hit. But DelRio should be fined, BB showed him the proper way to stick up for your players.

"Considering Tom's great games over the years against Jack Del Rio's defenses, you can understand the frustration,"

Coach, consider yourself *****-slapped!

BB's been getting a little "chippy" lately, it's interesting. Last week Charley Casserly, now this.

 

[PSU]

I agree with the ruling. The helmet contact didn't appear intentional. These things just happen sometimes. If you watch the replay you can clearly see the defender bracing and positioning his shoulder for a hit. But DelRio should be fined, BB showed him the proper way to stick up for your players.

"Considering Tom's great games over the years against Jack Del Rio's defenses, you can understand the frustration,"

Coach, consider yourself *****-slapped!

Didn't appear intentional? Sure as h#$@ looked to me as though "the defender" was running like a cruise missile into Brady's back....oh, by the way, with his helmet of course. Look up spearing in the rule book and tell me what it says.