| 0 |
Subject: Matt Forte: Rule change 'absurd'
Posted by: holt
- [1414114] Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 00:31
Who comes up with this crap?
Trying to think of a rule that is dumber than this one. Nothing comes to mind right away. |
| 1 | Tree
ID: 0271015
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 10:17
|
Emmitt Smith chimed in the other day on this as well...
"If I’m a running back and I’m running into a linebacker, you’re telling me I have to keep my head up so he can take my chin off?" Smith said Thursday in an exclusive interview with Dallas radio station 105.3 The Fan. "You’ve absolutely lost your mind."
that's the part that sums is up for me - the mere thought of the injuries that can come from that is gruesome.
|
| 2 | Frick
ID: 432501512
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 10:19
|
You mean if the defender lowers his head? Or if the defender is also held to the same standard and has to keep his head up?
The NFL has a serious problem with the long-term health of its players. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. Unless the game can adapt, it isn't going to be around in the future.
|
| 3 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 29542105
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 15:47
|
sure it is its called flag football
|
| 4 | holt
ID: 1414114
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 17:57
|
LOL
There does need to be some attention paid to brain injuries, but this rule defies logic and is all for show.
I'd like to see one of these rules makers run into a linebacker at full speed and see if he tucks his chin or not. I'm betting that he will bend at the waist, lower his shoulders, with the helmet naturally following, then lead with the crown (so as to not have his head bent backwards and having his neck broken). Actually I'm betting that he will do the QB slide while crapping his pants, thereby avoiding the whole collision.
Maybe that's what they want football to become. All slides, no collisions. I've already heard actual discussion regarding the possibility of completing eliminating kickoffs. Come on.
|
| 5 | Tree
ID: 32251812
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 19:34
|
The NFL has a serious problem with the long-term health of its players. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. Unless the game can adapt, it isn't going to be around in the future.
making a rule that lessens one injury, but increases a different yet equally as severe (if not more so) injury, isn't helping the problem.
|
| 6 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169
Mon, Mar 18, 2013, 20:01
|
That's because the rule isn't intended to fix the problem, but protect the NFL against future lawsuits by players.
I agree that the NFL has a huge health problem with the players. But rather than look toward fixing that it is just covering its ass.
|
| 7 | Frick
ID: 432501512
Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 09:18
|
I was always taught that the correct way to tackle was head up, see what you are hitting. It could be selective memory, but are there examples of serious injuries from head's up tackles?
Trying to outlaw and penalize the types of actions that lead to serious injuries and concussions seems like a reasonable action.
Does anyone know if Rugby has the injury rate that football does. Very similar games with regards to contact, but the removal of helmets and pads makes me wonder if the players are as willing to lead with unarmored body parts to their opponents?
|
| 8 | weykool
ID: 54011222
Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 10:06
|
I dont know if this is a viable rule or not.
To those of you who are critical of the rule what would you suggest?
The NFL has a serious liability/safety problem and if they do nothing then the quip about flag football will become a reality.
The rule only applies to ball carriers outside the tackle box, so runs up the middle are not affected.
It seems to be in response to defenders getting penalized for helmet to helmet collisions when more often than not those collisions are being initiated by the ball carrier.
I can to recall the same kinds of arguments being made whenb the helmet to helmet and hitting defenseless receiver rules were introduced.
The players had to adapt but the net result was a safer game.
|
| 9 | holt
ID: 1414114
Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 16:55
|
To me, the difference is that the defensive player is the one who initiates the contact and has the most control over the angles and points of contact. The ball carrier/receiver is the one wearing the bullseye. They aren't the ones seeking the contact.
Now if you see a WR using the crown of his helmet to throw a block in a flagrant way, that should be a penalty, but isn't there already something in the books for this? Personal foul. I just really don't want to see instances where drives get killed because a runningbacks helmet happens to hit a linebacker.
|
| 10 | holt
ID: 1414114
Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 16:55
|
Owners pass crown of helmet rule.
|
| 11 | holt
ID: 1414114
Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 17:05
|
If enforcement of the rule is done as described in that article (on the rare "extreme" hits) then this rule won't be a problem. I hope Fisher's observations are correct.
|
| 12 | Ref
ID: 34731299
Thu, Apr 25, 2013, 10:20
|
It is the rules committee of each sport who tells the game officials exactly how they want it called. The NBA has a member of the officiating staff on the rules committee which is great because he can talk about the complexities of what that rule will entail. To my knowledge, no other sport has someone like that on their board. The officiating staffs are in constant contact with this committee and can change anything at any time per the committee's wishes.
As far as this rule, I actually like it as far as it has been explained to me as how it will be called. The defender can't put his head down so why should the ball carrier be allowed to take off the defender's chin who is using the prescribed legal technique.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Matt Forte: Rule change 'absurd'
|