Why does the discussion have to go that route?
I'm saying a natural result of the new enforcement policy will be a lowering of the defender's target zone.
That's going to result in more shots to the legs and knees. Am I off base?
My question was is that a good thing or a bad thing and as fans are we cool with the fact that we will likely see an increase in knee injuries?
That's a bit of a leap. Players would already be targetting that area if it were the most effective way for them to tackle a player. On KRs players dive for knees and ankles.
It all boils down to the fact that defenders have more options to tackle or attack the football, but find it easier to spear with helmets and disrupt plays.
Absolutely agree. I'm not sure why you think I'm arguing that point.
Thing is we are asking them to change the way they are doing things currently.
It would be great if guys could always hit the midsection. That's just not possible.
We're asking them to go lower with their target. When guys go lower, even without spearing (which one doesn't do with the shoulder), it's going to turn into more hits around the knees. Hence the question, are you good if Robinson dropped down and hit Jackson around the knees?
My basic position is that most injury causing tackles either to the head or to the knees are a result of unintentional contact exacerbated by bad technique.
It's great to clean up the technique but I don't think new emphasis on technique enforcement it will eliminate the inadvertent contact. I think it's likely to be ineffective in lowering the frequency of concussions and will result in an increase of other types of injuries.