Started By
Message
Thoughts on new rule change for this season regarding defenseless player
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:41 pm
Quote from Steve Shaw today:
Personally, I hate this and it's going to cost someone big. I already have my issues with teh targeting penalty in general (especially the official statement by Shaw that if there is any doubt, it's targeting), but I think this goes too far. YOu see it MANY times throughout the course of a game where a ballcarrier and a defender are approaching each other, the defender begins his tackle, the ballcarrier slides, and there's some incidental contact. When your'e moving that fast in real time sometimes it's simply not possible to just stop.
I can already see this happening and even with zero malicious intent whatsoever, someone's elbow is going to scrape a ballcarrier's helmet and it's going to be a targeting penalty. I hate this.
quote:
the first one is a sliding ball carrier. So, really the change here is now by rule definition a sliding ball carrier -- and they've got to slide feet first, and the slide starts when they obviously give themselves up. But once they've obviously given themself up, sliding feet first, they become a defenseless player.
What does that mean? Why is that important? Well, even though before it could have been a late hit if he was down, but now because he's defenseless as a
sliding ball carrier, if there's forcible contact to the head or neck area, it now converts to a targeting foul.
The opportunity here for defenders is when you see that player go into a slide, pull up, stay off his head, and hopefully there's a player change of behavior there that helps us. And, again, a player safety-type situation
Personally, I hate this and it's going to cost someone big. I already have my issues with teh targeting penalty in general (especially the official statement by Shaw that if there is any doubt, it's targeting), but I think this goes too far. YOu see it MANY times throughout the course of a game where a ballcarrier and a defender are approaching each other, the defender begins his tackle, the ballcarrier slides, and there's some incidental contact. When your'e moving that fast in real time sometimes it's simply not possible to just stop.
I can already see this happening and even with zero malicious intent whatsoever, someone's elbow is going to scrape a ballcarrier's helmet and it's going to be a targeting penalty. I hate this.
This post was edited on 7/12/16 at 1:43 pm
8
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:46 pm to WG_Dawg
It's like holding. It could be called often or rarely - room for subjectivity. Lot of gray area and tough for the officials as well as fans.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:49 pm to TexAgChill
quote:
It's like holding. It could be called often or rarely - room for subjectivity. Lot of gray area and tough for the officials as well as fans.
And I get that. But this is made worse by the previous statement from shaw regarding targeting:
quote:
I know targeting gets so much press. It -- because of the implication of the player, the disqualification component, we have to be correct.
Now, let me preface this by saying there's no change to our officials on the field. The rule book says when in question, it's a targeting foul. It's not Shaw, it's not anybody else. The rule book says when in question, it's a targeting foul.
So now you have an extremely gray-area type judgment call with a runner sliding and getting nicked accidentally by an elbow on the helmet, and by the letter of the law officials, if they have any doubt, are supposed to automatically defer to targeting.
This post was edited on 7/12/16 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:50 pm to WG_Dawg
Who's going to be the first player smart enough to start faking slides? It's going to happen sooner or later.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:50 pm to WG_Dawg
I would tend to err on the side of caution rather than let questionable stuff not be called and I am fully aware this rule will affect Foster more than just about anyone. I think these rules are attempting to make players stop using there heads, helmets and bodies as missiles and start tackling properly and I am ok with that.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:52 pm to artompkins
quote:
I think these rules are attempting to make players stop using there heads, helmets and bodies as missiles and start tackling properly and I am ok with that.
Right and if we're talking about a free safety launching himself at a receiver who isn't even looking I can see that. But the chain reaction of sliding -> defender already left feet but attempts to miss -> gray area results in targeting is going to be an issue.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:54 pm to RB10
quote:
Who's going to be the first player smart enough to start faking slides? It's going to happen sooner or later.
I agree. This could lead to something nobody wants to see - football's version of flopping.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:56 pm to WG_Dawg
There are going to be some smart arse dual threat QB's who will learn how to time this right and take a hit from a would-be tackler...in order to get the guy DQ'd. Also, I won't be surprised to here the tv announcer say, "he then faked the slide, but then changed direction." Dual threat QB's might also train how to do that as well to freeze defenders.
This post was edited on 7/12/16 at 2:05 pm
Posted on 7/12/16 at 1:59 pm to TexAgChill
quote:
I agree. This could lead to something nobody wants to see - football's version of flopping.
The game is creeping closer and closer to QBs wearing flags.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:03 pm to WG_Dawg
Is this new? I was watching a replay of a game the other day (can't remember which one) and a player got kicked out for exactly what you describe.
Anyway, absolutely hate the rule. Especially the DQ component.
Anyway, absolutely hate the rule. Especially the DQ component.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:06 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
themself
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:11 pm to RB10
quote:
Who's going to be the first player smart enough to start faking slides? It's going to happen sooner or later.
This.
I fully expect this to be a point of emphasis so look for A LOT of calls as the pendulum starts on one extreme.
Regarding fake slides, our own JFF I think utilized the false stepping out of bounds a couple of times, once against Oklahoma in the Cotton Bowl in 2012. That specific play, I think you see the defender slow up, and JFF went right by. I think the intent of the defender was to not get a flag.
There will be a ton of flags for this, and look for QBs to give up their bodies for a first down from a personal foul.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:14 pm to RB10
quote:
Who's going to be the first player smart enough to start faking slides
Meh, not sure, but not drastically different than the old Cam Newton, Mike Vick, < insert another dynamic DT QB >... run toward the side line, fake cut outside then stretch it up field for a few more if the defender backs off, or step out at the last second if they pursue. It's all garbage.
The key word in the whole thing is "targeting". This implies some degree of intent to hit a specific area. If a player is sliding, the only part of their body that's really going to be available to hit is going to be above the waist... drastically increasing the chances of head/neck contact. I'm all about player protection but in a game that's already had almost every major rule change of the last decade plus in the favor of the offense, this seems like a bit much.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:16 pm to Jobu93
quote:
JFF
Yep, could easily include him in my post. I specifically remember that happening at least once.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:18 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Meh, not sure, but not drastically different than the old Cam Newton, Mike Vick, < insert another dynamic DT QB >... run toward the side line, fake cut outside then stretch it up field for a few more if the defender backs off, or step out at the last second if they pursue. It's all garbage
There is actually quite a big difference with this new rule. Hitting those guys, and sliding QBs, used to only be a 15-yard PF, but now it can lead to an immediate ejection on top. That's a big deal.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:20 pm to WG_Dawg
Getting a little tired of the coddling of offensive players.
They know what they're getting in to when they sign up to play. I played in high school. I knew that getting hit in the head probably wasn't the best for my brain. However I did it because I enjoyed the sport and playing with my teammates.
Should spearing and obvious tackles meant to inflict harm on another player's head be punishable? Definitely. However the refs have obviously been instructed to err on the side of the offensive player, which screws over defensive players trying to enjoy probably their last time playing football (since most of them won't be playing in the NFL).
They know what they're getting in to when they sign up to play. I played in high school. I knew that getting hit in the head probably wasn't the best for my brain. However I did it because I enjoyed the sport and playing with my teammates.
Should spearing and obvious tackles meant to inflict harm on another player's head be punishable? Definitely. However the refs have obviously been instructed to err on the side of the offensive player, which screws over defensive players trying to enjoy probably their last time playing football (since most of them won't be playing in the NFL).
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:24 pm to RB10
The initial implementation of the first targeting rule was absolute horseshite. Even if the call was reversed the player was ejected. There were also too many "just in case" flags thrown.
Even after they cleaned up the ejection issue, the "just in case" flag remains. The refs on the field kick the can up to the booth and that is that.
The same will happen with these slides. I don't like it one bit, as I'm defensive centric.
Even after they cleaned up the ejection issue, the "just in case" flag remains. The refs on the field kick the can up to the booth and that is that.
The same will happen with these slides. I don't like it one bit, as I'm defensive centric.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:29 pm to WG_Dawg
The rule should also be that the runner is considered down at the point where he begins to give himself up. That way there is no room for gaining an extra yard in the process of sliding.
Posted on 7/12/16 at 2:39 pm to Aux Arc
quote:
The rule should also be that the runner is considered down at the point where he begins to give himself up.
No
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News