What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Horse Collar (1 Viewer)

Disclaimer...this is not meant to ride the ref bashing wave...it's a legit question and I'm looking to hear the rules experts on this one.

There was a play in which Alexander appeared to be blatantly collared. There was no flag and I don't remember the announcers saying anything as well. Since this is a new rule and isn't called too much is there a reason this wasn't called (i.e. what happened was infact legal) because it seemed like a textbook example of the infraction.
I was waiting for a flag and was surprised that one was not thrown. Madden did make reference to it "being close to a horse collar" tackle. Something like that...I was specifically waiting to hear comments about the play.To me, it looked like other HC tackles that I've seen during the year that were flagged. I guess its like the PI calls that were rampant early and then faded out.

 
This is the closest I could find to how the rule is written.

It was inserted into Rule 12, Section 2, Article 1 as subpoint (d). Here’s how it reads:

All players are prohibited from grabbing the inside collar of the back or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads and immediately pulling down the runner. This does not apply to a runner who is in the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

The key word in the paragraph is “immediately.” It is not illegal for a player to grab those spots and use the leverage to pull himself toward the runner.  It is illegal to grab the pads inside the collar and immediately pull downward. 
:shrug:
Perhaps the motion of the pull determines whether it is a legal tackle. A downward motion is illegal but pulling horizontally is OK.
 
This is the closest I could find to how the rule is written.

It was inserted into Rule 12, Section 2, Article 1 as subpoint (d). Here’s how it reads:

All players are prohibited from grabbing the inside collar of the back or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads and immediately pulling down the runner. This does not apply to a runner who is in the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

The key word in the paragraph is “immediately.” It is not illegal for a player to grab those spots and use the leverage to pull himself toward the runner.  It is illegal to grab the pads inside the collar and immediately pull downward. 
:shrug:
Perhaps the motion of the pull determines whether it is a legal tackle. A downward motion is illegal but pulling horizontally is OK.
I posted this in a different thread. It is the closest I have come to the actual rule in the book:USA Today article on the passage of the horsecollar rule

Key to the rule's language, as it was in the original draft, is for the yanking to be immediate. And officials also will have to make the distinction between a defender grabbing the shoulder pads or the top of the jersey. A takedown from behind with the defender grabbing a fistful of jersey is still legal.
Others have stated they believe Porter grabbed the top of the jersey, i.e. the collar, and not the pad. I could not tell based on the camera angles whether or not Porter grabbed the top of the jersey or had Alexander's shoulder pad. The official might have considered the tackle to be legal based on the "immediate" qualifier.Potentially you may have something there as far as giving some guidelines to what is immediate vs. not immediate, since it is subjective. Perhaps a mostly vertical tackle is immediate, whereas a more horizontal tackle is not. It's pretty crazy. The best thing they could do is prevent the shoulder pads from being grabbed at all...

 
I think that enforcing this particular foul was put on the back burner because the wording of the rule is kind of ambiguous.

The problem with doing that is this rule change was hyped so much when it was passed, that just about every fan knows something about the rule and is looking for one to be called. Then want to know why it was or wasn't called, when the foul itself can be interpreted 4 or 5 different ways...

People want consistency, well this foul was consistently not called for most of the season...

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top