What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Cheap Shot or Not? (1 Viewer)

Cheap Shot or Not?

  • Yes, Ward should be fined and suspended

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes, Ward should be fined

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes, but no fine and no suspension

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Borderline cheap shot

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No, it was a clean hit during the course of the game

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
wadegarrett

wadegarrett

FFA Legend™
Have seen a couple blogs about this hit that happened yesterday in the Browns/Bengals game. Wanted to get thoughts of people here.

Hit in question:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheap shot? No. Watch the video, he clearly hit him with his shoulder pad. If he had led with his helmet, then yes I would say it was a cheap shot.

Ward was trying to make a play, end of story. Ward had one step to stop all of his momentum without hitting Shipley. No way he could have stopped in time.

Having said that, a rule is a rule and he should/will be fined for the hit. But it's part of the game. People applaud Tatum's play back in the day. Today's players try to emulate him, and they get yelled at about cheap shots and illegal hits.

One thing to note is that Cleveland finally has a heavy hitter in the secondary. :thumbup:

 
I don;t know what else he could lead with. He didn't lead with the helmut. This is a clean hard football play in my opinion. Is he supposed to play patty cake? They have made play in the secondary ridiculous. Now it's pretty clearly part of strategy to just throw it up for grabs and hope for penalities.

Ridiculous penalty.

 
That's what supposed to happen when a tiny little WR goes over the middle. What is the DB supposed to do? He's trying to dislodge the ball. It's really a no win situation for these defensive players.

 
In today's game - it was a clean, albeit unnecessary hit.

At some point though, you have to wonder if the players will ever start to think about the unnecessary abuse they dish out, and take, in the course of a game. Football is a violent game. It always will be. But you hear of the physical problems so many former players are having and you begin to wonder if all the "extra" hits players dish out and take are really necessary.

On some level, you need to establish a certain "toughness" I suppose - but the future cost is so great (and sometimes the current cost is pretty significant). I would expect the players themselves to do a better job of protecting their own future health.

 
Sinn Fein said:
In today's game - it was a clean, albeit unnecessary hit.At some point though, you have to wonder if the players will ever start to think about the unnecessary abuse they dish out, and take, in the course of a game. Football is a violent game. It always will be. But you hear of the physical problems so many former players are having and you begin to wonder if all the "extra" hits players dish out and take are really necessary. On some level, you need to establish a certain "toughness" I suppose - but the future cost is so great (and sometimes the current cost is pretty significant). I would expect the players themselves to do a better job of protecting their own future health.
Click to expand...
Unnecessary?? :confused:
 
The ball was on the ground by the time he made the hit, so all this "trying to dislodge the ball" talk is misplaced. While his shoulder did hit Shipley, he was leading helmet first and made helmet to helmet contact. It was a late and unnecessary hit, he should expect to be making an involuntary donation to charity shortly. The flag was justified, I dont think a suspension would be. The flag was especially justified if the call at the end of the half on the Bengals was.

 
Borderline. Very close to cheap. This is a rough game as we all know.

Big fine for sure and deservedly so.

 
He led with his shoulder, not his helmet. And while he leaned into it and did give "a hit," he did not leave his feet.

Perfectly legal play. And I have no dog in the race.

 
Borderline. The ball was already on the ground when he hit him. I realize that things happen fast out there, but that's the reason I think you could call it an unnecessary hit. It looked like he tried to lead with his shoulder, but there did appear to be helmet to helmet contact first.

I don't know...I could see it going either way. Voted borderline cheapshot.

 
He lead with his shoulder into the helmet, then cracked helmets. Cheap shot. Should be suspended.

Maybe he should have played the ball.

 
The game is rough enough when played clean ... completely unecessary trying to injure someone like that.

Weren't there flags thrown ... how could it have been a clean hit?

 
Ahhh I remember when Football was...well Football!

Defensive backs used to make WR's pay for going in the middle, remember Ronnie Lott, Steve Atwater, Kenny Easley...these players made a living on this. They put the fear in WR's and now it is a penalty. I can understand trying to protect the players but the players also need to understand the dangers of going over the middle. They are making it so this game is not even bearable to watch. Also, I did not see much difference from this hit to Ray Lewis' hit on Dustin Keller in week 1, except Ray is a star.

 
Peak said:
Cheap shot? No. Watch the video, he clearly hit him with his shoulder pad. If he had led with his helmet, then yes I would say it was a cheap shot.Ward was trying to make a play, end of story. Ward had one step to stop all of his momentum without hitting Shipley. No way he could have stopped in time.Having said that, a rule is a rule and he should/will be fined for the hit. But it's part of the game. People applaud Tatum's play back in the day. Today's players try to emulate him, and they get yelled at about cheap shots and illegal hits. One thing to note is that Cleveland finally has a heavy hitter in the secondary. :thumbup:
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Tatum wouldn't be allowed to play in today's NFL.
 
You want to really scare players. Go for the mid section, not the head. This could hurt more and be legal. It might not take them out of the game, but they won't want that hit anymore.

 
I think the hit was borderline cheap only based on the timing. If Shipley was still trying to make a catch, I really think he should be allowed to crush him including going after his head like that. In this case though, he did this already knowing the pass was dropped. He did it anyway to send a message which is exactly what the NFL has been trying to cut down on.

Penalty/fine, no suspension.

 
Sinn Fein said:
In today's game - it was a clean, albeit unnecessary hit.At some point though, you have to wonder if the players will ever start to think about the unnecessary abuse they dish out, and take, in the course of a game. Football is a violent game. It always will be. But you hear of the physical problems so many former players are having and you begin to wonder if all the "extra" hits players dish out and take are really necessary. On some level, you need to establish a certain "toughness" I suppose - but the future cost is so great (and sometimes the current cost is pretty significant). I would expect the players themselves to do a better job of protecting their own future health.
Click to expand...
Caught a little of the CAR-NO game yesterday and after an INT, a NO player got laid out on a blindside block and was down for awhile (I think this was the game and situation, forgive me if I'm off...lot of flipping around). One of the announcers made a comment similar to yours that maybe players will realize that such a violent hit isn't 100% necessary (as opposed to making a straight up block with your hands) and may eventually tone it down on these plays as a sign of mutual respect for everyone's health, if you will.Thought it was unlikely but pretty interesting.
 
I am all for player safety, but I have never liked the "defenseless" receiver rule......

who puts the receiver in a defenseless position?.....the receiver and the QB......if you don't want to get hit in a defenseless position, don't put yourself in it........nobody is forcing these guys to be put in the position....yet we expect the defenders to make split second adjustments and stop on a dime or not hit a guy in a certain area........

I agree leading with the helmet should be illegal, but everything else should be fair game........if a WR gets blown up by a hit that is not with the helmet there should be no flag.......run the ball if you don't want to throw it....

 
That is just good physical football. Next time Shipley will keep his head up and be aware of the defenders.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref said:
I am all for player safety, but I have never liked the "defenseless" receiver rule......

who puts the receiver in a defenseless position?.....the receiver and the QB......if you don't want to get hit in a defenseless position, don't put yourself in it........nobody is forcing these guys to be put in the position....yet we expect the defenders to make split second adjustments and stop on a dime or not hit a guy in a certain area........

I agree leading with the helmet should be illegal, but everything else should be fair game........if a WR gets blown up by a hit that is not with the helmet there should be no flag.......run the ball if you don't want to throw it....
Click to expand...
Mostly agree, but how far after the play should this apply? There has to be a cutoff for that and I think that is what is getting Ward in trouble here.
 
I only wish it was T.O. that got smashed and not Shipley, especially after his tearful description of Ward's hit.

And I especially loved Palmer attempting to act tough with 3-4 of his own lineman surrounding him.

 
cheese said:
Stinkin Ref said:
I am all for player safety, but I have never liked the "defenseless" receiver rule......

who puts the receiver in a defenseless position?.....the receiver and the QB......if you don't want to get hit in a defenseless position, don't put yourself in it........nobody is forcing these guys to be put in the position....yet we expect the defenders to make split second adjustments and stop on a dime or not hit a guy in a certain area........

I agree leading with the helmet should be illegal, but everything else should be fair game........if a WR gets blown up by a hit that is not with the helmet there should be no flag.......run the ball if you don't want to throw it....
Click to expand...
Mostly agree, but how far after the play should this apply? There has to be a cutoff for that and I think that is what is getting Ward in trouble here.
Click to expand...
if the hit is late, it should most definately be a flag and that will just have to be a judgement call for the official.....WR's get paid to catch the ball......defenders get paid to keep them from catching it.....in my mind the cutoff is when the WR no longer has a chance to catch the ball and what I think is a reasonable amount of time for a defender to switch gears from "i'm trying to break this play up" to "I can hold up and stop from hitting this guy".......that cutoff will be different from one person to the next and their judgement.....I just think sometimes we (fans/officials) expect the defenders to switch that gear way to fast.......and they get called for it it and don't ever really get the benefit of the doubt, and get labled as cheap shot guys and stuff.........this play is a pretty good example.....although the link above is the only look I have had at it and can't really tell by the angle how late/bad it was...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No and no again. And Palmer should shut his mouth because you know he didn't see what happened. If a defense is going to have any chance at stopping an offense the DB's have to put hits like that on WRs.

 
"No" or "Hell No" are the only two answers I was thinking of.

As stated many times...shoulder to helmet hit, the object is to jar the ball loose, the other object is to intimidate the opposing player, the other, other job is to tackle the opposing player.

No penalty, no fine, quit belly aching.

 
CrossEyed said:
Borderline. The ball was already on the ground when he hit him. I realize that things happen fast out there, but that's the reason I think you could call it an unnecessary hit. It looked like he tried to lead with his shoulder, but there did appear to be helmet to helmet contact first.

I don't know...I could see it going either way. Voted borderline cheapshot.
Click to expand...
BSShipley hit the ground before the ball did.

 
Runningman said:
No and no again. And Palmer should shut his mouth because you know he didn't see what happened. If a defense is going to have any chance at stopping an offense the DB's have to put hits like that on WRs.
Click to expand...
WRONG.At the game with seats in the endzone where the hit was made. The Bengals (Palmer, TO, and others) did not react until after they saw it on a replay screen. The hit was cheap and will result in a fine. Would love to see what would happen if Ford tries that on Hines Ward.
 
I usually laugh at all the mamby-pamby FBGs here complaing about cheapshots but I didn't like this hit. Headshots when someone is defenseless is cheap whether its from a helmet or shoulder.

 
knowledge dropper said:
Runningman said:
No and no again. And Palmer should shut his mouth because you know he didn't see what happened. If a defense is going to have any chance at stopping an offense the DB's have to put hits like that on WRs.
Click to expand...
WRONG.

At the game with seats in the endzone where the hit was made. The Bengals (Palmer, TO, and others) did not react until after they saw it on a replay screen. The hit was cheap and will result in a fine.

Would love to see what would happen if Ford tries that on Hines Ward.
Click to expand...
T.J. Ward <> T.J. Ford
 
daveR said:
CrossEyed said:
Borderline. The ball was already on the ground when he hit him. I realize that things happen fast out there, but that's the reason I think you could call it an unnecessary hit. It looked like he tried to lead with his shoulder, but there did appear to be helmet to helmet contact first.

I don't know...I could see it going either way. Voted borderline cheapshot.
Click to expand...
BSShipley hit the ground before the ball did.
Click to expand...
That's wrong. Watch it again. On the close up of the hit the ball has already hit the ground and is bouncing up when the hit is made.But it's the combination of all factors that makes it a borderline cheapshot. Like I said, I realize that things happen fast out there.

For those who keep referring to how it used to be and guys like Jack Tatum, we know a LOT more about head injuries and the long term affects that shots to the head cause. It just doesn't make any sense to allow guys to take shots at other guys heads, no matter what part of your body you are leading with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fanatics said:
Ahhh I remember when Football was...well Football! Defensive backs used to make WR's pay for going in the middle, remember Ronnie Lott, Steve Atwater, Kenny Easley...these players made a living on this. They put the fear in WR's and now it is a penalty. I can understand trying to protect the players but the players also need to understand the dangers of going over the middle. They are making it so this game is not even bearable to watch. Also, I did not see much difference from this hit to Ray Lewis' hit on Dustin Keller in week 1, except Ray is a star.
Click to expand...
Good thing you remember, b/c the players themselves have dimentia (not to mention depression, hip problems) starting at age 40.It's not a bad thing to protect the players.
 
New rules now. Defenseless receiver & should be fined. If this was the 60's, 70's or 80's it's just football. Welcome to 2010

 
Eh, I think it was a good hit. He seemed to lead with the shoulder, not the helmet. Yes, his helmet turned down a bit, but that was incidental. From that angle, when you lead with the shoulder, it is almost impossible for your helmet to not lower a bit, but he definitely led with the shoulder. 20 years ago, this would have been on NFL highlight films. Now, it is a penalty and probably a fine.

 
i dont understand why "leading with the shoulder" should absolve him of all responsibility. he clearly attempted to take the guys head off in a brutal and unnecessary fashion.

 
It's a blow to the head of a defenseless receiver, which is a personal foul. A defender can put a big hit on a receiver trying to catch the ball, but it needs to be to the body, not the head.

- Definitely a personal foul

- Whether it's a cheap shot depends on if he was intentionally going for the head, which is hard to tell because Shipley comes down pretty low

- I'd give it a small fine and no suspension

 
cvnpoka said:
i dont understand why "leading with the shoulder" should absolve him of all responsibility. he clearly attempted to take the guys head off in a brutal and unnecessary fashion.
Click to expand...
let's be honest, the recent rule changes have all favored the offense and the WR.......the intimidation and making you think about having your clocked cleaned is about all these DB's have left.........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hot Sauce Guy
"Cheap Move" or Nah?
4 5 6
Replies
276
Views
7K
jon_mx
J
Chaka
Week 14 2023 who should I start thread **OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL**
2 3
Replies
148
Views
3K
GPS
G
Chaka
Week 13 2023 who should I start thread **OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL**
3 4 5
Replies
205
Views
3K
Dez
Dez

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top