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.
It is impossible to prove intent in most cases.
We know they always get the call right on the field the first time.
Second that.The sport moves too fast to second guess every minute detail of a play like this.99% of the helmet to helmet or led with the helmet type hits happen incidentally due to the way the play unfolds, not due to malicious intent.to all above who said it wasn't intentional. It was an unfortunate accident.
I'm not saying they got it right or wrong, only that I heard there was no flag on the play.
So remove that particular hit from the subject, and make it more general. If a player DOES intentionally put a helmet to helmet hit on a player... should they be suspended?I know that opens up a can of worms, judging intent. But I also believe we already have in place penalties and fines where the ref, and or later the commissioner has to judge intent. But if it is determined the players intent was to lead with the helmet into the other players helmet... does that merit a suspension?to all above who said it wasn't intentional. It was an unfortunate accident.
No way that was intentional. Acidents happen. Boldin ducked his helmet down too. Had he kept his head up nothing would have happened. I think leading with a helmet deserves a fine, but just because the resulting play was very horrific for Boldin's future doesn't mean we need to over react. It was an accident.If it becomes a theme with a certain player then yes, I think a suspension is warranted. But then you have to put a limit on it. 1 in 3 consecutive games? 4 within 5 games? how do you quantify intent by that!? If a player appears to be head hunting then yes I think a 4 game suspension without pay is good enough. That's 1/4 of the seasoin. I think year suspension for something so open to interpretation is a bit extreme, plus ou would have a REAL hard time proving intent once the player sued the league for wrongful suspensionSo remove that particular hit from the subject, and make it more general. If a player DOES intentionally put a helmet to helmet hit on a player... should they be suspended?I know that opens up a can of worms, judging intent. But I also believe we already have in place penalties and fines where the ref, and or later the commissioner has to judge intent. But if it is determined the players intent was to lead with the helmet into the other players helmet... does that merit a suspension?
no flag on the play. inadvertent helmet-to-helmet.Boldin´s head was first hit from behind then accelerated into the helmet of the second defender. all players were making a play for the ball. clean play. unfortunate result, but still a clean play.
So like an "eye for an eye" type thing? Doesn't that make the world go blind?
I call bull#### on that.Violent hits? Sure, there are a lot of those types that ESPN anchors love to yell "BAM!" when they collide.
The rule reads:
I'm not going to type up all of 12.2.12.3 because of length, but portions relevant to this would include:
Regardless of intent, the results are clearly an illegal hit (though I won't blame the refs for not calling it at real life speed). He launched himself and hit the other player in the head with his helmet. Even if he was aiming for his chest it's still an illegal hit. I also watched the replay and that endline does a good job of giving you a reference for how much the hit from behind made Boldin's head lower. It didn't lower all that much, maybe half the height of his helmet at most. Not enough to turn a hit on his chest with no chance of hitting his head into what happened. I'd say Bolding was getting a helmet on the chin even without the hit from behind. The extra whiplash of going forward and back made the results worse for him though.The defender's problems were he launched himself and he went straight up head to head on a line with him. If he'd gone shoulder to chest to where their heads were offset, it wouldn't have been a problem.
That is exactly what happened.I voted NO
I don't have Boldin on any of my teams. Yes, I think he's a great WR... but that has nothing to do with my poll...
He led with his helmet. Guys have to have more respect for their fellow players. Hits like this have to be fined to make sure that dbacks think a little more about how they are going after receivers.Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion and you are certainly entitled to yours. However, I do not see how anyone can look at that hit and not conclude that he was clearly leading with his helmet. I'm not sure I would call the hit dirty or even cheap. The only thing I am sure about is that he clearly led with his helmet and hit a defenseless WR with said helmet square in the face. Intent or no, the hit is an absolute clear violation of the rule, and in fact, IMO, this hit is the definition of exactly why the rule is in place. Boldin's lucky to be alive.
What planet do you live on? Smith clearly led with his helmet....and just because there was no flag does not mean that there was no foul. This will be reviewed and Smith should get a suspension.And please don't talk about how you played football.......it just makes you sound silly
He did not lead with his helmet. That was my whole point. He hit him with his facemask. Helmet to helmet applies when you hit the defender with your head down (top of your helmet). Smith's hit was within the rules of football. He wouldn't even had hit Boldin in the facemask had it not been for Rhodes hitting Boldin from behind. After watching it again Rhodes is the one that deserves a fine. Rhodes hits Boldin from behind with the top of his helmet to the back of Boldin's head.
Boldin was pushed from behind, was he not? We both know that answer was yes. This changed the location of where Boldin was vs. where Boldin ended up when Smith hit him. Your head is located right next to your shoulder the last time I checked. If Smith was leading with his shoulder, and the push from behind moved Boldin from where he was just a fraction of a second earlier, do you see any way possible that Smith had zero intention of leading with his head?That kind of hit rattles the defender also (as it did). Do you really think Smith was purposely trying to injure himself also? He could have just as easily broken his neck if intentionally leading with his helmet like that.Get real. NFL Football happens FAST! This was not premeditated.
The rule is so clear I can't understand how anyone can even begin to argue that this is a clean hit.I said it in the other Boldin thread. He lowered his head, left his feet and led with his helmet. There should have been a flag on the play. There should be a big fine. I think there should be a suspension, though I don't think it should be for a year.His intent is irrelevant. He made a really dangerous, illegal play without regard for player safety.
Boldin being pushed from behind changes everything. Due to the push, Boldin's body was in a different place then it was at the time Smith launched. If Boldin wasn't pushed, Smith maybe (dare I say probably) doesn't hit him with his head at all. Your head is located right next to your shoulder pad. And yes, a player being pushed can change his positioning enough where your head now hits him rather than your shoulder. All he had to move was less than a foot for this to happen and he surely moved further than that.The rule is so clear I can't understand how anyone can even begin to argue that this is a clean hit.I said it in the other Boldin thread. He lowered his head, left his feet and led with his helmet. There should have been a flag on the play. There should be a big fine. I think there should be a suspension, though I don't think it should be for a year.His intent is irrelevant. He made a really dangerous, illegal play without regard for player safety.
Not to be a jerk, but you are just wrong on this. Read the rule again. If you lead with your helmet, regardless if it's the face mask, crown, hairline or otherwise, it's a spear.
