PDA

View Full Version : Ejections Coming For Helmet-to-Helmet Hits


Atlanta Dan
11-10-2007, 01:58 PM
The NFL has told its officiating crews to start ejecting players for flagrant helmet-to-helmet hits.

"Officials will be reminded this week to pay strict attention to these rules and disqualify the fouling player if the action is judged to be flagrant," Pereira wrote in the memo sent to the 32 NFL teams. "Actions that involve flagrant helmet to helmet contact are the likely acts that will include disqualification. Our commissioner and this office remain very focused on the safety of our players."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3103608

This of course is yet another policy intended to protect QBs. To get someone thrown out of a game it better be real blatant or I see yet another way for the league to assure it gets the Colts-Pats rematch it wants by ejecting opposing teams' defenders in the playoffs.

Crushzilla
11-10-2007, 02:01 PM
The NFL has told its officiating crews to start ejecting players for flagrant helmet-to-helmet hits.

"Officials will be reminded this week to pay strict attention to these rules and disqualify the fouling player if the action is judged to be flagrant," Pereira wrote in the memo sent to the 32 NFL teams. "Actions that involve flagrant helmet to helmet contact are the likely acts that will include disqualification. Our commissioner and this office remain very focused on the safety of our players."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3103608

This of course is yet another policy intended to protect QBs. To get someone thrown out of a game it better be real blatant or I see yet another way for the league to assure it gets the Colts-Pats rematch it wants by ejecting opposing teams' defenders in the playoffs.

WOW

This has potential to really influence some games. I hope you're right Dan and that it would take a hell of a hit to give someone the boot for this.

MasterOfPuppets
11-10-2007, 02:18 PM
and we have one more step towards flag football....:shake01:

The Duke
11-10-2007, 02:18 PM
This of course is yet another policy intended to protect QBs

or another way for the league to protect pretty boy Brady

tony hipchest
11-10-2007, 03:03 PM
"Officials will be reminded this week to pay strict attention to these rules and disqualify the fouling player if the action is judged to be flagrant," Pereira wrote in the memo sent to the 32 NFL teams. nice stunt to wait for the patriots bye week. maybe the nfl figured they needed the extra week to figure out the correct interpretation of the memo.

this sucks cause in basketball you can "draw a foul" all the time. i think players will learn to "draw a foul" in this instance and take a shot to the head to get a player flagged and ejected.

Lord Stiller
11-10-2007, 03:22 PM
Does this include cheap-shots on QB's?????????

I hope so

HometownGal
11-10-2007, 03:33 PM
I don't advocate deliberate helmet to helmet hits, but sometimes it is as a result of finishing the tackle and not intended to injure. I can hear Fairy Tom whining to the officials already when a defender even looks at his helmet. :dang:

NFL - National Fruitcake League

Black@Gold Forever32
11-10-2007, 03:43 PM
Remember last year against the Falcons when Ben received that blow to the head that resulted in another concussion?....A flag wasn't even thrown on that one....

As for this new role.....I agree you need to look out for head hunters....But as others have mentioned sometimes contact to the helmet can't be avoided......So really officials need to see if the contact was accidental before throwing a defensive player out of the game.....

I also agree that Brady will be looking for a way to abuse the rule so he can be the little puss like he always is...The guy is a great QB but he is a puss...lol

Preacher
11-10-2007, 04:46 PM
Remember last year against the Falcons when Ben received that blow to the head that resulted in another concussion?....A flag wasn't even thrown on that one....

As for this new role.....I agree you need to look out for head hunters....But as others have mentioned sometimes contact to the helmet can't be avoided......So really officials need to see if the contact was accidental before throwing a defensive player out of the game.....

I also agree that Brady will be looking for a way to abuse the rule so he can be the little puss like he always is...The guy is a great QB but he is a puss...lol

I agree... matter of fact, I would like for instant replay to be used for that call... instead of just calling it on the spot.

MasterOfPuppets
11-10-2007, 04:52 PM
I agree... matter of fact, I would like for instant replay to be used for that call... instead of just calling it on the spot.
i don't know preach.....it's a " judgement " call, so i'm against it. look at how often there wrong on pass interference, but yet they won't go to the booth for those calls.

jjpro11
11-10-2007, 11:54 PM
they should eject players if its in combination with another foul.. late hit, roughing the passer, stuff like that. other than that its going to be stupid if they are ejecting key defenders for accidentally hitting with their helmet. at the speed they play at, you dont have time to perfectly line up your shoulder and lay a blow. its obvious they are doing it because of the recent concussion talk. i guess we'll have to wait and see how they enforce it.

fansince'76
11-11-2007, 12:38 AM
Remember last year against the Falcons when Ben received that blow to the head that resulted in another concussion?....A flag wasn't even thrown on that one....

Yep, I remember it, but karma's a bitch - the Falcons are a train wreck this year.

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 07:10 AM
i guess we'll have to wait and see how they enforce it.


Here is one possibility

Pats trail Steelers in a January playoff game - Anthony Smith and Troy then ejected for tackling Tom Terrific.

Steelman16
11-11-2007, 08:40 AM
Here is one possibility

Pats trail Steelers in a January playoff game - Anthony Smith and Troy then ejected for tackling Tom Terrific.

That is a very distinct possibility. I can see why they implemented this new rule, but really, football is football folks. If you wanted to play a safer sport, ya shoulda stuck with basketball or baseball. I mean c'mon.

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 08:46 AM
and we have one more step towards flag football....:shake01:

OK Chris Speilman!

It's for flagrant hits folks. Everyone here (expect for the dolts from Ohio) know what a flagrant helmet to helmet hit looks like. If you're really sitting here saying this is a bad thing, there are two possibilities:

A. You used to use your helmet as weapon when you played because you didn't have the talent to hang.
B. You never played. football.

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 08:59 AM
OK Chris Speilman!

It's for flagrant hits folks. Everyone here (expect for the dolts from Ohio) know what a flagrant helmet to helmet hit looks like. If you're really sitting here saying this is a bad thing, there are two possibilities:

A. You used to use your helmet as weapon when you played because you didn't have the talent to hang.
B. You never played. football.

I do not think most of us are applauding helmet to helmet hits - the question is since they do not always call it when it occurs (e.g. - Ben suffers a serious concussion in ATL and there is no flag) and on other occasions call it when the hit is below the helmet level, there is a lot of discretion and margin for error.

Back in the day the Pats lost a playoff game to the Raiders in 1976 on a phantom blow to the head to Stabler that kept a drive alive. Combine that with such sketchy playoff calls as waving off Troy's interception in the Colts playoff game several years ago and you have real potential for an ejection that will perceived as protecting a golden boy QB and his team. If the league wants a suspension, impose that for the next game just as the league imposes fines for flagrant hits only after the league office reviews the video of the play. It is hard enough to get the call right without having to then adjudicate specific intent and decide a penalty was so flagrant it requires immediate ejection..

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 09:04 AM
I do not think most of us are applauding helmet to helmet hits - the question is since they do not always call it when it occurs (e.g. - Ben suffers a serious concussion in ATL and there is no flag) and on other occasions call it when the hit is below the helmet level, there is a lot of discretion and margin for error.

Back in the day the Pats lost a playoff game to the Raiders in 1976 on a phantom blow to the head to Stabler that kept a drive alive. Combine that with such sketchy playoff calls as waving off Troy's interception in the Colts playoff game several years ago and you have real potential for an ejection that will perceived as protecting a golden boy QB and his team. If the league wants a suspension, impose that for the next game just as the league imposes fines for flagrant hits only after the league office reviews the video of the play. It is hard enough to get the call right without having to then adjudicate specific intent and decide a penalty was so flagrant it requires immediate ejection..

Fair enough, but read back through this thread. You don't get that vibe at all, you get the vibe that some people want to keep this part of football alive.

Folks, helmet to helmet hits are dangerous. I'd rather the NFL err on the side of caution with this one. Besides, the NFL can find other ways to make sure Tom Terrific and his merry band of metrosexuals win another Super Bowl.

fansince'76
11-11-2007, 09:12 AM
....Tom Terrific and his merry band of metrosexuals....

Folks, we have a new name for the Pacheatriots! :toofunny:

MasterOfPuppets
11-11-2007, 09:34 AM
OK Chris Speilman!

It's for flagrant hits folks. Everyone here (expect for the dolts from Ohio) know what a flagrant helmet to helmet hit looks like. If you're really sitting here saying this is a bad thing, there are two possibilities:

A. You used to use your helmet as weapon when you played because you didn't have the talent to hang.
B. You never played. football.
oh i'd have no problem with it , IF.......i thought the incompetent officials could make the right descisions. how many 15 yd penalties have you seen ,unjustly , handed out, because one of these incompetents decided a hit on a qb didn't meet the new standards ? i'm all for throwing out guys who take cheap shots like the one that was put on trent green.

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 09:46 AM
oh i'd have no problem with it , IF.......i thought the incompetent officials could make the right descisions. how many 15 yd penalties have you seen ,unjustly , handed out, because one of these incompetents decided a hit on a qb didn't meet the new standards ? i'm all for throwing out guys who take cheap shots like the one that was put on trent green.

Like I said, I'd rather err on the side of caution than have the NFL do nothing at all so head hunters like AJ Hawk can keep taking cheap shots to mask their lack of talent.

MasterOfPuppets
11-11-2007, 10:00 AM
Like I said, I'd rather err on the side of caution than have the NFL do nothing at all so head hunters like AJ Hawk can keep taking cheap shots to mask their lack of talent.actually they have been handing out fines left and right. i think thats the way to go. the problem is, 5 or ten grand hardly puts a dent in thier pockets. if they uped the stakes to 50 - 100 dollar range, then they'll take notice. as dan said, making a snap descicion is a bad idea, it should be reviewed by the governing body, not 1 person who may or may not have seen the hit clearly.

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 10:05 AM
actually they have been handing out fines left and right. i think thats the way to go. the problem is, 5 or ten grand hardly puts a dent in thier pockets. if they uped the stakes to 50 - 100 dollar range, then they'll take notice. as dan said, making a snap descicion is a bad idea, it should be reviewed by the governing body, not 1 person who may or may not have seen the hit clearly.

OK, then bring the replay officials in to the mix. Let the referee go to the box and see what actually happened.

Fines are nothing. Even a $100,000 is nothing to someone like Merriman or Lewis. Even suspensions mean nothing in today's NFL. If you want teeth in the system, make it three strikes and you're out. After three flagrant helmet to helmet hits, you sit for a full season. Every flagrant hit after that is another season.

MasterOfPuppets
11-11-2007, 10:12 AM
OK, then bring the replay officials in to the mix. Let the referee go to the box and see what actually happened.

Fines are nothing. Even a $100,000 is nothing to someone like Merriman or Lewis. Even suspensions mean nothing in today's NFL. If you want teeth in the system, make it three strikes and you're out. After three flagrant helmet to helmet hits, you sit for a full season. Every flagrant hit after that is another season.
i think that would lend a bit more credibility to the call. they could go something like...
1st time 1 game ,plus game check
2nd time 4 games ,plus game checks
3rd time out for season ,no pay

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 10:21 AM
i think that would lend a bit more credibility to the call. they could go something like...
1st time 1 game ,plus game check
2nd time 4 games ,plus game checks
3rd time out for season ,no pay

Exactly, make the money hurt and things will turn around in a hurry.

MasterOfPuppets
11-11-2007, 10:26 AM
Exactly, make the money hurt and things will turn around in a hurry.
ok, do you wanna go ahead and fax our ruling to Godell or should i ??? :sofunny:

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 10:33 AM
ok, do you wanna go ahead and fax our ruling to Godell or should i ??? :sofunny:

I think we let Nigel do it since he's the Patriots fan.

MasterOfPuppets
11-11-2007, 10:42 AM
I think we let Nigel do it since he's the Patriots fan.

you know the funny part is, the freakin schmuck probably is reading this....:toofunny:

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 11:06 AM
OK, then bring the replay officials in to the mix. Let the referee go to the box and see what actually happened.

Fines are nothing. Even a $100,000 is nothing to someone like Merriman or Lewis. Even suspensions mean nothing in today's NFL. If you want teeth in the system, make it three strikes and you're out. After three flagrant helmet to helmet hits, you sit for a full season. Every flagrant hit after that is another season.

Well why not have the replay officials decide how much of a fine should be imposed?

Cowher says on pregame he is on board with having the league office review and decide whether to suspend since it just puts another judgment call on the game officials.:thumbsup:

tony hipchest
11-11-2007, 11:08 AM
If the league wants a suspension, impose that for the next game just as the league imposes fines for flagrant hits only after the league office reviews the video of the play. It is hard enough to get the call right without having to then adjudicate specific intent and decide a penalty was so flagrant it requires immediate ejection..good call dan. bill cowher just expressed this same sentiment almost verbatim, on the pre game show.

send it to gene washington, before any time is lost.

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 03:57 PM
good call dan. bill cowher just expressed this same sentiment almost verbatim, on the pre game show.

send it to gene washington, before any time is lost.

Just remove the threat of ejection totally. No more ejections for anything!

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 04:48 PM
Just remove the threat of ejection totally. No more ejections for anything!

Just saying wait until the next game - Ed.B. of the P-G says Dan Rooney appears to agree

Just talked to Dan Rooney in the press box and we agree, that a new directive by the NFL to eject players from the game if they are judged to have hit helmet to helmet can be dangerous.

What happens if the officials toss a guy because they believe it's a helmet hit and replays show it actually wasn't? Officials long have been reluctant to eject players from football games, rightfully so. A season is only 16 games long; missing one is like a baseball player missing 10 games.

Now that you have the NFL encouraging officials to eject players, where will they stop?

What's wrong with reviewing a play on Monday and deciding then whether it was a blatant helmet hit? If it is, fine the player and suspend him for a game. At least then, you'd be sure.


http://www.postgazette.com/steelers/blogngold/

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 06:12 PM
Just saying wait until the next game - Ed.B. of the P-G says Dan Rooney appears to agree

Just talked to Dan Rooney in the press box and we agree, that a new directive by the NFL to eject players from the game if they are judged to have hit helmet to helmet can be dangerous.

What happens if the officials toss a guy because they believe it's a helmet hit and replays show it actually wasn't? Officials long have been reluctant to eject players from football games, rightfully so. A season is only 16 games long; missing one is like a baseball player missing 10 games.

Now that you have the NFL encouraging officials to eject players, where will they stop?

What's wrong with reviewing a play on Monday and deciding then whether it was a blatant helmet hit? If it is, fine the player and suspend him for a game. At least then, you'd be sure.


http://www.postgazette.com/steelers/blogngold/

Because you take away the element of fear. Now a guy will go ahead and do a helmet to helmet if he thinks it can help his team win a big game.

Rhee Rhee
11-11-2007, 06:37 PM
i wish they'd kinda let someone play i say the give a guy two chances like if he knocks the snot out of one guy and it's totally illegal give him one more chance until u kick him out of the game

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 06:40 PM
i wish they'd kinda let someone play i say the give a guy two chances like if he knocks the snot out of one guy and it's totally illegal give him one more chance until u kick him out of the game

Have any of you actually been the victim of one of these hits?

I have. They're damned dangerous. Most of these flagrant hits come when the player on the recieving end of the hit is partially defenseless. It can cause you a ton of problems. The worst part is that there are a lot of defensive coaches and players who actually think these hits are "just part of the game" and we should stop complaining so much about them.

My answer to that is simple, let me hit you in the head with a baseball bat when you're not looking and we'll see if your opinion changes.

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 07:20 PM
Because you take away the element of fear. Now a guy will go ahead and do a helmet to helmet if he thinks it can help his team win a big game.

We will agree to disagree - vigilante justice is wrong whether administered by players or officials - as Ed.B. notes, a ref may feel pressured if he does not eject the player - why not instant ejections on clips and blows below the knees? - concussions are very serious business, but more careers are cut short by leg injuries.

Your argument that anyone opposing instant ejections is pro-shots to the head is a red herring.

Jeremy
11-11-2007, 07:55 PM
We will agree to disagree - vigilante justice is wrong whether administered by players or officials - as Ed.B. notes, a ref may feel pressured if he does not eject the player - why not instant ejections on clips and blows below the knees? - concussions are very serious business, but more careers are cut short by leg injuries.

Your argument that anyone opposing instant ejections is pro-shots to the head is a red herring.

Not so. I simply question your dedication to preventing head injuries.

Atlanta Dan
11-11-2007, 08:49 PM
Not so. I simply question your dedication to preventing head injuries.

Sorry I do not meet your standards of being sufficiently opposed to head trauma.

What do I need to do - come out for lifetime bans? The fact that Dan Rooney and Cowher apparently share my view would appear to indicate those who know far more about the game than either of us have concerns about this PR move.

I do not know how long you have been posting here - I provided links on this board over a year ago to NY Times stories on the long term impact of concussions (Andre Waters) and the decision in the Fourth Circuit Court Appeals that rejected the NFL//NFLPA appeal that vigorously fought an award of disability benefits to Mike Webster's family for Webster having suffered game related head trauma. In addition, during the week prior to the Raiders game last year I posted repeatedly that Cowher should sit Ben and, several weeks later, that Troy should sit after he suffered brain trauma in the Saints game.

This is typical league office PR - they are terrified of doing anything that costs them real $$ or exposure to potential long term liability by admitting better helmets should be considered, players should be required to receive independent medical clearance prior to returning to play after a concussion, or the long term consequences of repeated head trauma to all players (please walk me through how this new policy could have helped Webster or Waters). Instead, the league is glad to engage in a cheap PR stunt by pretending the problem can be significantly mitigated by having refs decide not only whether a blow is a penalty but whether it is sufficiently egregious to require ejection for the limited purpose of protecting, at best, the QB position.

GBMelBlount
11-11-2007, 09:05 PM
I don't advocate deliberate helmet to helmet hits, but sometimes it is as a result of finishing the tackle and not intended to injure.

Yep.

Agree... matter of fact, I would like for instant replay to be used for that call... instead of just calling it on the spot

Yep, to me it is that important as well.