NFL might start suspending over flagrant hits that are currently illeg (1 Viewer)

[NinerFan49]

When traumatic brain damage is at stake, I think rules should be enforced strongly.

So you are in the camp that says "all" helmet to helmet contact should be flagged, fined, or suspended?

Maybe not in ALL cases... but in almost all cases, yes. Seeing fewer helmet to helmet hits will increase, not decrease, my enjoyment of football... as will seeing fewer prayer circles around unconscious players.

 

[Choke]

but in almost all cases, yes.

Like when the OLinemen fire out and hit the DLinemen (and blitzers) at the snap and have multiple helmet-to-helmet contacts every play.Sarcasm>>> We really need to stop that from occuring. Not Sarcasm>>> Because you know that someone is going to have their life cut short (already happened assuredly) from those hits.

 

[NinerFan49]

First of all, it didn't look to me as if Harrison hit Mossaquoi on the head accidentally, it looked to me as if he did it deliberately.

But, to answer, your question... Let's assume that Harrison wanted to play within the rules and not risk the kind of illegal hit that he was penalized for... If instead of firing his forearms at Mossaquoi, he had led with his chest... as Ronnie Lott used to do, he wouldn't have have been fined, even if Mossaquoi had lowered his head. There's nothing in the rules about not hitting players on the head with your chest. Read it again:

h) If a receiver has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself, a defensive player is prohibited from launching (springing forward and upward) into him in a way that causes the defensive player's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm to forcibly strike the receiver's head or neck area -- even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm is lower than the receiver's neck.

Look man I understand and agree with the rule...that isn't in question.Thing is to suggest any football player "leads with their chest" in an attempt to make a tackle just completely invalidates your entire opinion. It is a very overused phrase, but "knows nothing about the sport" applies in your case.

To suggest that Ronnie Lott "led with his chest" is just totally asinine.

I can't even imagine a guy trying intentionally to stick his sternum in the other guys helmet to make a tackle.

What little credibility you had is just 100% gone.

You can make whatever smarmy, pseudo-witty comeback you want you aren't even worth the effort.

Have Harrison's fanboys stopped crying yet about their hero being penalized for being a dirty player?

 

[Steeler]

Has Harrison stopped crying yet about having to play by the rules?

Hypothetical question: a defender leads with his chest, wraps up a WR, and then accidentally slides up where helmet to helment contact is made... should that defender be flagged, fined, or suspended?

Of course not. But the fact remains that many hits should be flagged. Let's not pretend they can't or shouldn't be managed because there is incidental head to head contact that is unavoidable.

But what I described is exactly the way the rule is written! I don't think anyone is "for" more head injuries... but as the NFL rule is written, the defender can be flagged, fined, suspended if helmet-to-helmet contact is made regardless of where the initial contact occured. I think THAT is what many of us are arguing against in this thread.

here is the rule again:h) If a receiver has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself, a defensive player is prohibited from launching (springing forward and upward) into him in a way that causes the defensive player's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm to forcibly strike the receiver's head or neck area -- even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm is lower than the receiver's neck.If the defender does not strike with the helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm, he won't be penalized. If the defender aims to strike with the chest and then wrap his arms around the ball carrier (textbook tackling technique), the chances of him being penalized are almost zero.

If the defender tries to hurt the ball carrier by striking him with the helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm and he gets penalized, he has nothing to cry about. He chose to do something that he should have known could result in an illegal hit.

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

 

[Pantherz]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

 

[NinerFan49]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

You have a point. It is possible that as a result of rule h), there will be some cases where a tackler is unjustly penalized. But in my opinion, that risk is worth taking if it will lead to fewer tacklers trying to "hurt" instead of just tackle a player by striking him with their helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm. Look at it this way: If a driver runs a yellow light and kills someone, he's probably going to be found guilty of manslaughter... Though he didn't intend to kill anyone.

Drivers who run yellow lights and tacklers who try to hurt other players by striking them with their helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm in an area close to the neck or head are choosing to take an unnecessary risk... So when that risk backfires, they can cry all they want, but they are being punished for a risk they chose to take.

And when a tackler injures two players in the same game AND breaks a rule he should have known AND brags about how he wants to hurt other players, he should expect zero sympathy when he is penalized for being a dirty player...

 

[Choke]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

But shouldnt Harrison do the same as Dunta? Harrison actually goes low and hits him after MM takes 4 steps with the ball. Dunta goes high and does it after 2 steps.

Both deliver wicked blows. Both knock the ball loose.

 

[DropKick]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

 

[Choke]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

As a Steeler fan...I agree. Same as Wards hit on Ed Reed awhile back. Those are the type of hits that justify a fine and suspension.

 

[Pantherz]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

But shouldnt Harrison do the same as Dunta? Harrison actually goes low and hits him after MM takes 4 steps with the ball. Dunta goes high and does it after 2 steps.

Both deliver wicked blows. Both knock the ball loose.

I'm looking more at where the helmet was aimed. Dunta went to Jackson's shoulder with his helmet. It doesn't even look like there is any helmet to helmet contact. Harrison went straight for helmet to helmet contact on both plays. And he looked proud of it.

 

[Choke]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

But shouldnt Harrison do the same as Dunta? Harrison actually goes low and hits him after MM takes 4 steps with the ball. Dunta goes high and does it after 2 steps.

Both deliver wicked blows. Both knock the ball loose.

I'm looking more at where the helmet was aimed. Dunta went to Jackson's shoulder with his helmet. It doesn't even look like there is any helmet to helmet contact. Harrison went straight for helmet to helmet contact on both plays. And he looked proud of it.

He is proud to blow up people, no doubt. On the MM hit JH is clearly leaning down (away from the helmet) to deliver the blow well before MM. MM ducks his head at the last moment cause he let the ball slip.

1

2

3

4

 

[Steeler]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

What does me being a Steeler fan have to do with anything? And what extreme am I taking this to? I'm reading the rule and thinking about future incidents where defenders will be punished even if they tried to do everything right. You don't expect that to happen?

 

[NinerFan49]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

I agree that Robinson's hit on Jackson was the least "dirty" of all those plays. However... I do think it was reckless.... I know that defenses want to intimidate receivers who run routes over the middle by "hurting" them with vicious hits. And I'm willing to take Robinson at his word when he says he intended to deliver a legal hit. But by aiming his shoulder at an area that was too close to Jackson's head, he took the risk that he might strike Jackson on the neck or head (either initially or after the initial contact). If he didn't know about rule h), he should have. If he did know that rule, he should have known that by aiming his shoulder at an area too close to Jackson's neck, he was in danger of delivering an illegal hit. Yes, both players were moving very fast... But:

1) Robinson could have moved slower and aimed better... at the middle of Jackson's chest, not high on his chest. Or

2) Robinson could have gone for a "wrap the player up and take him down," not for for the vicious hit. Or

3) Robinson could have aimed to make contact with the chest first, not with the shoulder... and he probably would not have violated rule h).

When the risk is traumatic brain injury or a broken neck, I'm ok with erring on the side of safety. Robinson being fined (or suspended) is a far lesser tragedy than the damage he caused. And... let's not forget... it could have been worse...

If Robinson had broken Jackson's neck, would people still be saying he shouldn't have been fined?

 

[treat88]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

Absolutely agree.Deliberate shots to the head of a defenseless player should be eliminated.Very few people would argue with that.

 

[Pantherz]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

I agree that Robinson's hit on Jackson was the least "dirty" of all those plays. However... I do think it was reckless.... I know that defenses want to intimidate receivers who run routes over the middle by "hurting" them with vicious hits. And I'm willing to take Robinson at his word when he says he intended to deliver a legal hit. But by aiming his shoulder at an area that was too close to Jackson's head, he took the risk that he might strike Jackson on the neck or head (either initially or after the initial contact). If he didn't know about rule h), he should have. If he did know that rule, he should have known that by aiming his shoulder at an area too close to Jackson's neck, he was in danger of delivering an illegal hit. Yes, both players were moving very fast... But:

1) Robinson could have moved slower and aimed better... at the middle of Jackson's chest, not high on his chest. Or

2) Robinson could have gone for a "wrap the player up and take him down," not for for the vicious hit. Or

3) Robinson could have aimed to make contact with the chest first, not with the shoulder... and he probably would not have violated rule h).

When the risk is traumatic brain injury or a broken neck, I'm ok with erring on the side of safety. Robinson being fined (or suspended) is a far lesser tragedy than the damage he caused. And... let's not forget... it could have been worse...

If Robinson had broken Jackson's neck, would people still be saying he shouldn't have been fined?

It absolutely was a violent hit on Jackson, but it's just my personal opinion that there is a difference in hitting the torso(chest or shoulder), and lunging in for a direct helmet to helmet hit. I'm ok with erring on the side of caution too, but I don't want it to get too complicated for the defense or the refs. Hard hits can't be stopped. They were running head on into each other and a collision was inevitable. I just think Robinson's hit, vs. the others, was doing his job. The others looked to plainly be head hunting, with an intent to injure. Those are the ones I think should get stiff penalties.

 

[Choke]

Hard hits can't be stopped.

Sure they can.

 

[Pantherz]

Hard hits can't be stopped.

Sure they can.

And you're right. The NFL can do whatever they want. I just don't want to see the game change that much. If they start trying to get the defense to hit "soft", the game is ruined. It wouldn't even be football then. I would like the emphasis to stay on avoidable helmet to helmet shots. I think thats feasible. Hitting slower or softer aint football.

 

[NinerFan49]

I just looked at James Harrison's two hits and they both looked like "headhunting" helmet to helmet hits. Fine him. Let him retire if he wants to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJvKt1vF4GM

The Merriweather hit on Heap was headhunting, too. Fine him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1CmHk9GK0

However, I just looked at Dunta Robinson's hit on DeSean Jackson and it looked like a hit on the right shoulder. This was a violent collision but his job is to keep the reciever from catching the ball, and he didn't go after Jackson's head. You can't expect him to pull up in a split second. I don't like the fact that he was fined.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAR_zEvT7dM

I agree that Robinson's hit on Jackson was the least "dirty" of all those plays. However... I do think it was reckless.... I know that defenses want to intimidate receivers who run routes over the middle by "hurting" them with vicious hits. And I'm willing to take Robinson at his word when he says he intended to deliver a legal hit. But by aiming his shoulder at an area that was too close to Jackson's head, he took the risk that he might strike Jackson on the neck or head (either initially or after the initial contact). If he didn't know about rule h), he should have. If he did know that rule, he should have known that by aiming his shoulder at an area too close to Jackson's neck, he was in danger of delivering an illegal hit. Yes, both players were moving very fast... But:

1) Robinson could have moved slower and aimed better... at the middle of Jackson's chest, not high on his chest. Or

2) Robinson could have gone for a "wrap the player up and take him down," not for for the vicious hit. Or

3) Robinson could have aimed to make contact with the chest first, not with the shoulder... and he probably would not have violated rule h).

When the risk is traumatic brain injury or a broken neck, I'm ok with erring on the side of safety. Robinson being fined (or suspended) is a far lesser tragedy than the damage he caused. And... let's not forget... it could have been worse...

If Robinson had broken Jackson's neck, would people still be saying he shouldn't have been fined?

It absolutely was a violent hit on Jackson, but it's just my personal opinion that there is a difference in hitting the torso(chest or shoulder), and lunging in for a direct helmet to helmet hit. I'm ok with erring on the side of caution too, but I don't want it to get too complicated for the defense or the refs. Hard hits can't be stopped. They were running head on into each other and a collision was inevitable. I just think Robinson's hit, vs. the others, was doing his job. The others looked to plainly be head hunting, with an intent to injure. Those are the ones I think should get stiff penalties.

I'm still ok with the league "erring on the side of caution" when it comes to those kinds of hits... But I respect your opinion. And I agree that was by far the least objectionable of all of those hits.

 

[Choke]

Hard hits can't be stopped.

Sure they can.

And you're right. The NFL can do whatever they want. I just don't want to see the game change that much. If they start trying to get the defense to hit "soft", the game is ruined. It wouldn't even be football then. I would like the emphasis to stay on avoidable helmet to helmet shots. I think thats feasible. Hitting slower or softer aint football.

You hear that being stated already. By fans, coaches and players alike.We wouldnt even be having this midseason change and discussion if it wasnt for the league wanting 18 games. It would have been an offseason move.

 

[Kosar]

The most storied franchise in the NFL has always had a legacy of having the toughest/loud mouthed linebackers in the league.

Jack Lambert

Greg Lloyd

Joey Porter

James Harrison

Wow. Just...wow.

The NFL did exist before 1974, unbeknownst to most Steeler fans.

The apologists in here are truly unbelievable.

 

[treat88]

The most storied franchise in the NFL has always had a legacy of having the toughest/loud mouthed linebackers in the league.

Jack Lambert

Greg Lloyd

Joey Porter

James Harrison

Wow. Just...wow.

The NFL did exist before 1974, unbeknownst to most Steeler fans.

The apologists in here are truly unbelievable.

Yep definitely a lack of perspective by some.I'm not going to go getting all warm and gushy over AFL titles, but there are many storied teams with long lists of exceptional players in this league.

The Browns not the least amongst them.

 

[Pantherz]

Hard hits can't be stopped.

Sure they can.

And you're right. The NFL can do whatever they want. I just don't want to see the game change that much. If they start trying to get the defense to hit "soft", the game is ruined. It wouldn't even be football then. I would like the emphasis to stay on avoidable helmet to helmet shots. I think thats feasible. Hitting slower or softer aint football.

You hear that being stated already. By fans, coaches and players alike.We wouldnt even be having this midseason change and discussion if it wasnt for the league wanting 18 games. It would have been an offseason move.

To me the real issue(for the NFL) is to have the rules clear, enforceable and have the players able to comply without stopping them from making plays. Not an easy task, but I do think it can be done.

 

[DropKick]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

What does me being a Steeler fan have to do with anything? And what extreme am I taking this to? I'm reading the rule and thinking about future incidents where defenders will be punished even if they tried to do everything right. You don't expect that to happen?

You're familiar with the play, right?No... I don't expect that to happen. What "wording" are you so worried about?

 

[ScottyFargo]

lol @ the interpretation of Harrison's crying as "making a point." The point that he made is that he's not strong enough to play within the rules. The fake outrage is way more unmanly than the fake idea that's been floated that this rule enforcement will wussify the league. The league is wussified by deifying guys who can't hang with players who can adapt their hitting style sto conform with the existing, long established rule set.

 

[Choke]

lol @ the interpretation of Harrison's crying as "making a point." The point that he made is that he's not strong enough to play within the rules. The fake outrage is way more unmanly than the fake idea that's been floated that this rule enforcement will wussify the league. The league is wussified by deifying guys who can't hang with players who can adapt their hitting style sto conform with the existing, long established rule set.

H8ers gonna H8.

 

[Steeler]

We'll just agree to disagree then. I don't think defenders should be penalized for what happens accidentally if the initial contact is legal. Also, I think it's a problem that the rule doesn't account for the offensive player changing the location of his head (ducking, etc)... so with these rules, I think too many defenders will be penalized, even if they tried to follow the letter of the law.

I think your needlessly taking this to an extreme... As a Steeler fan, take a look at Clark's hit on Welker in 2008. Seriously late, obviously incomplete, opportunistic and blatant cheap shot. That is what they need to eliminate.

What does me being a Steeler fan have to do with anything? And what extreme am I taking this to? I'm reading the rule and thinking about future incidents where defenders will be punished even if they tried to do everything right. You don't expect that to happen?

You're familiar with the play, right?No... I don't expect that to happen. What "wording" are you so worried about?

Clarks hit on Welker -- yeah I'm familiar -- it was bad.Basically, I don't like the portion of the rule that says the defender can be punished if helmet to helmet contact occurs accidentally even if the defender made initial contact "legally".

 

[westbrook36]

just hit the receiver like this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqmdI3tVuMA

 

[NinerFan49]

just hit the receiver like this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqmdI3tVuMA

1. Ouch...2. Hmmm... Could that be proof that there are more targets on the human body than the head and the knees?

 

[Choke]

just hit the receiver like this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqmdI3tVuMA

2. Hmmm... Could that be proof that there are more targets on the human body than the head and the knees?

Bush doesnt duck his head into his midsection area.

 

[DesmondBishop]

To me the hit on Cribbs is done on purpose and that is the one he should be suspended for, he is running in on the play and clearly Cribbs is bent over already and he DELIBERATELY lowers the top of his helmet and drills Cribbs in his head. That is a 100% dirty cheap shot and he should be suspended for it.

Nothing against Harrison personally, but that is the kind of hit the NFL needs to take much more serious action on, there was no need to lower his helmet on that hit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

Just look from about 38 seconds on and you will see what I mean.

 

[Choke]

To me the hit on Cribbs is done on purpose and that is the one he should be suspended for, he is running in on the play and clearly Cribbs is bent over already and he DELIBERATELY lowers the top of his helmet and drills Cribbs in his head. That is a 100% dirty cheap shot and he should be suspended for it.

Nothing against Harrison personally, but that is the kind of hit the NFL needs to take much more serious action on, there was no need to lower his helmet on that hit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNchGcD85Y

Just look from about 38 seconds on and you will see what I mean.

We go from here... http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/5639/cribb1.jpgwith Cribbs as a RB running downfield away from JH...

to here.... http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/7771/cribb2.jpg

in less then about ½ of a second. Look at the game clock. Its 9:23 & 9:23.

 

[Ladsud]

"If I get a chance to knock somebody out, I'm going to knock them out and take what they give me, They give me a helmet, I'm going to use it."

Channing Crowder- Miami Dolphins

Lets take the helmets away and go old school.

 

[delusional]

Some eagle players already came out and said that wasnt a dirty it and it was a legal hit ( DR on DJax ). They are also saying the same thing as alot of other players and those involved with football, its taking a HUGE part of the game out of it while the NFL is making money on it.

Sorry don't care what anyone says but Roger G is killing this game. Some quotes

“As a defense, you’re having less and less of an ability to do anything,” said safety Quintin Mikell. “It’s like, ‘What can you do?’ You can’t hit them anymore. You can’t jam them past 5 yards. It’s like you want them to run scott-free, and then tackle them after they catch the ball.”

Harrison has since said he’s pondering retirement, unsure how a player of his mentality and makeup can exist in a league with so many restrictions.

“I understand where he’s coming from,” said linebacker Ernie Sims. “Especially as a defensive player, and being an aggressive defensive player, I understand where he’s coming from. We play this game to hit hard and to make big plays. And the plays I’ve seen him make, as a defensive player those are the type of plays you want to make. Yeah, I do understand where he’s coming from.”

Some in the Eagles’ locker room say they will not allow the specter of suspensions and big fines alter their approach. Others find it impossible to block out.

“You can’t roll the same way – not for 75 G’s!” said linebacker Omar Gaither. “It has to be in your mind. If it’s fourth-and-1, what do you want me to do? ‘Coach, I would love to get the stop, but those 75 thousand will hurt me’. I think it will have an effect – good or bad – on these upcoming games, so we’ll see what happens.”

“The one with DeSean – as tough as it is because that’s my man, my teammate – I personally didn’t see it as a dirty hit,” said Mikell. “I didn’t see it as a malicious hit. It was very violent and it cost both of them the rest of the game, but I’m not so sure it was helmet-to-helmet. So I don’t know.”

Now if the league is going to make Robinsons hit illegal now, when it was legal, just because his shoulder/helmet apparently slide up Djaxs body after intial contact, there are going to be alot of suspensions in the league.

 

[Steelfan7]

Harrison HAS made his point. He's a dirty player and a crybaby who doesn't think he should be held to the same rules all other players have to follow.

You seem to be the one crying the most over this issue.

 

[Steelfan7]

First of all, it didn't look to me as if Harrison hit Mossaquoi on the head accidentally, it looked to me as if he did it deliberately.

But, to answer, your question... Let's assume that Harrison wanted to play within the rules and not risk the kind of illegal hit that he was penalized for... If instead of firing his forearms at Mossaquoi, he had led with his chest... as Ronnie Lott used to do, he wouldn't have have been fined, even if Mossaquoi had lowered his head. There's nothing in the rules about not hitting players on the head with your chest. Read it again:

h) If a receiver has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself, a defensive player is prohibited from launching (springing forward and upward) into him in a way that causes the defensive player's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm to forcibly strike the receiver's head or neck area -- even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm is lower than the receiver's neck.

Look man I understand and agree with the rule...that isn't in question.Thing is to suggest any football player "leads with their chest" in an attempt to make a tackle just completely invalidates your entire opinion. It is a very overused phrase, but "knows nothing about the sport" applies in your case.

To suggest that Ronnie Lott "led with his chest" is just totally asinine.

I can't even imagine a guy trying intentionally to stick his sternum in the other guys helmet to make a tackle.

What little credibility you had is just 100% gone.

You can make whatever smarmy, pseudo-witty comeback you want you aren't even worth the effort.

Have Harrison's fanboys stopped crying yet about their hero being penalized for being a dirty player?

With your obvious lack of knowledge of the basics of football that you have displayed in this thread, I think your best option is to bow out gracefully and never post in this thread again.

 

[NinerFan49]

With your obvious lack of knowledge of the basics of football that you have displayed in this thread, I think your best option is to bow out gracefully and never post in this thread again.

Are Harrison's fanboys STILL crying yet because their mighty, mighty hero got a well-deserved penalty for being a dirty player?

Maybe the items below will cheer you up, Steelfan7:

1) http://bleacherreport.com/articles/497073-the-crying-game-exploring-james-harrisons-childish-reaction-to-being-fined

The Crying Game: Exploring James Harrison's childish reaction to being fined

By John Hughes

(Contributor) on October 20, 2010

Insofar as James Harrison is extolling the virtues of manliness and warlike mentality that (he claims) is so central to American Football, he certainly has been doing a lot of crying lately, hasn’t he?

His recent tirade, threatening to hang up his cleats for good should the NFL have its way on flagrant hits, has honestly been nothing short of childish. I don’t know if there’s sufficient evidence to label Harrison a dirty player, I don’t know if helmet-to-helmet hits are his M.O., but it must be said that this attempt to toss his toys out of the pram certainly can’t help his image.

Harrison derides the NFL’s “new rules” on flagrant hits and says they won’t allow him to “play his game” in the future. Excuse me? I think someone needs to point out to Mr. Harrison that helmet-to-helmet hits (specifically the kind he was fined for inflicting TWICE on Sunday and the type that the NFL has pledged to crack down on) have never been a part of modern football, and in fact have been illegal for as long as he’s been playing the game.

“And now you're telling me that everything that they've taught me from that time on, for the last 20-plus years, is not the way you're supposed to play the game anymore?” Harrison lamented (presumably with a quivering lip and through held-back tears). Yes James, if your coaches actually taught you that the best way to tackle someone is by launching your body through the air and slamming into the head of an offensive player, then yes everything you’ve been taught is, in fact, an example of how not to play the game.

For the record, I highly doubt that anyone in the Steelers organization, at Kent State, or anywhere else Harrison has plied his trade, has ever taught him that helmet-to-helmet hits are in fact O.K.

It’s hard to imagine that James Harrison doesn’t know helmet-to-helmet hits are illegal. It’s equally hard to imagine he doesn’t know in his heart of hearts that that was exactly the type of hits he set out to inflict on Sunday.

Those two corollaries bring up the interesting possibility that since Harrison realizes now that the NFL is actually going to start enforcing its helmet-to-helmet laws, he understands that he can’t play this game the way it’s actually meant to be played (below the head). If helmet-to-helmet hits are such a part of his “game” that there’s no way he can stop, perhaps he’s simply taking preemptive action before the NFL bans him for a mounting pile of illegal hits.

I don’t know if that’s the case, but if it is then I can’t imagine that anyone could say anything other than good riddance.

If it’s not (and again I profess to be no expert on Harrison’s typical tackle), then one can only scratch their head at how a grown man could, in fact, be such a crybaby.

2) http://www.pronewsblog.com/sports/james-harrison-punching-aaron-francisco/

<--- VIDEO LINK (copy-and-paste to browser)

James Harrison Punching Aaron Francisco!

Harrison is a dirty player. Look at this video where he pummels Aaron Francisco who is about 100 pounds smaller than him. He only gets a 15 yard penalty. He should have been ejected from the game! That could have been the difference between the Cardinals winning versus what happened. Harrison had just had anger management and counseling too for hitting his girlfriend! I suppose he wasn’t paying attention much!

3) http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090201233245AApG96r

Yahoo! Answers

Resolved Question

Is James Harrison a PUNK ?

I thought James Harrison should have been tossed for his unsportsmanlike conduct for that horrible foul he put on the Cardinals player. He pinned down the Cardinals player and then he kind choke him and just shove him to the ground. What a cowardly play that was, the refs should have kicked him out of the game. What do you think about the Harrison foul?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

I think Harrison is the biggest POS.

He was also arrested for beating his girlfriend awhile back.

Source(s):

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3284544

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08094/870237-66.stm

Asker's Rating:

5 out of 5

Asker's Comment:

This guy is a complete moron, he's out of control during that 1 particular play. I hope that's not who he is in real life but all those rap sheets.

 

[Steeler]

You last post...

I don't care if you hate Harrison, but does that last post really belong in this thread? I mean, some of us are trying to discuss the impact of the rule changes doing forward and that post can/will certainly derail the thread.

 

[Godsbrother]

Are Harrison's fanboys STILL crying yet because their mighty, mighty hero got a well-deserved penalty for being a dirty player?

I suppose this is aimed at Steelers fans so I will answer. The officials on the field did not think the hits were dirty or excessive -- Harrison wasn't penalized on either play. Look, the hitting was no different last week than it was 10 years ago. The main reason they're taking any action is to show they are being proactive in player safety which is certainly going to be an issue when they begin negotiating to expand the schedule to 18 games with the players association. They are also doing it to keep congress off their back.

 

[Godsbrother]

You last post...

I don't care if you hate Harrison, but does that last post really belong in this thread? I mean, some of us are trying to discuss the impact of the rule changes doing forward and that post can/will certainly derail the thread.

There used to be rules about pissing in the shark pool. Too bad they aren't enforced anymore...

 

[Stillers Jr.]

Coupla of things...

1. If you go through the controversial Steelers threads over the past year or so, the anti-Steeler fans have revealed themselves, b/c it's the same people stirring the pot. My suggestion, don't feed the trolls.

2. Between James Harrison and Big Ben, I have spent way too much of my life trying to rationalize with the irrational. If you think JH is crying, then that's a very interesting point you have.

3. I've posted this a few times and NOBODY will answer me as to why TJ Ward wasn't fined or even talked about in this debacle...you know, since we're all enraged and looking out for the players health and whatnot. VIDEO or SCREENCAP1, SCREENCAP2, SCREENCAP3. He's a repeat offender too...

 

[Stillers Jr.]

You last post...

I don't care if you hate Harrison, but does that last post really belong in this thread? I mean, some of us are trying to discuss the impact of the rule changes doing forward and that post can/will certainly derail the thread.

There used to be rules about pissing in the shark pool. Too bad they aren't enforced anymore...

Joe has been pretty clear he isn't a big Steeler fan. I think he started 10 different Big Ben threads a few months ago just to stir the pot...doubt he'd step in and police this one.

 

[Kosar]

Coupla of things...

1. If you go through the controversial Steelers threads over the past year or so, the anti-Steeler fans have revealed themselves, b/c it's the same people stirring the pot. My suggestion, don't feed the trolls.

2. Between James Harrison and Big Ben, I have spent way too much of my life trying to rationalize with the irrational. If you think JH is crying, then that's a very interesting point you have.

3. I've posted this a few times and NOBODY will answer me as to why TJ Ward wasn't fined or even talked about in this debacle...you know, since we're all enraged and looking out for the players health and whatnot. VIDEO or SCREENCAP1, SCREENCAP2, SCREENCAP3. He's a repeat offender too...

2. The entire country outside of Western PA thinks he's crying. You aren't going to convince anyone otherwise. He IS crying, like a little ##### in fact.3. That Youtube video shows nothing. Are you kidding me with that hit on Ben? And the second play: Hasn't it already been established that these hits do not apply to a runner, thus the reason the NFL isn't even talking about Harrison's hit on Cribbs?

This is pretty weak.

 

[Stillers Jr.]

Coupla of things...

1. If you go through the controversial Steelers threads over the past year or so, the anti-Steeler fans have revealed themselves, b/c it's the same people stirring the pot. My suggestion, don't feed the trolls.

2. Between James Harrison and Big Ben, I have spent way too much of my life trying to rationalize with the irrational. If you think JH is crying, then that's a very interesting point you have.

3. I've posted this a few times and NOBODY will answer me as to why TJ Ward wasn't fined or even talked about in this debacle...you know, since we're all enraged and looking out for the players health and whatnot. VIDEO or SCREENCAP1, SCREENCAP2, SCREENCAP3. He's a repeat offender too...

2. The entire country outside of Western PA thinks he's crying. You aren't going to convince anyone otherwise. He IS crying, like a little ##### in fact.3. That Youtube video shows nothing. Are you kidding me with that hit on Ben? And the second play: Hasn't it already been established that these hits do not apply to a runner, thus the reason the NFL isn't even talking about Harrison's hit on Cribbs?

This is pretty weak.

The hit on Mendenhall my friend. did you click the 3 screencaps? It was pretty clear if you took the time to read comprehend and click. The video you can FF to 56 seconds...I have no issue with the "hit" on Ben.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Are Harrison's fanboys STILL crying yet because their mighty, mighty hero got a well-deserved penalty for being a dirty player?

I suppose this is aimed at Steelers fans so I will answer. The officials on the field did not think the hits were dirty or excessive -- Harrison wasn't penalized on either play. Look, the hitting was no different last week than it was 10 years ago. The main reason they're taking any action is to show they are being proactive in player safety which is certainly going to be an issue when they begin negotiating to expand the schedule to 18 games with the players association. They are also doing it to keep congress off their back.

That's very cynical, don't you think?

 

[Kosar]

Coupla of things...

1. If you go through the controversial Steelers threads over the past year or so, the anti-Steeler fans have revealed themselves, b/c it's the same people stirring the pot. My suggestion, don't feed the trolls.

2. Between James Harrison and Big Ben, I have spent way too much of my life trying to rationalize with the irrational. If you think JH is crying, then that's a very interesting point you have.

3. I've posted this a few times and NOBODY will answer me as to why TJ Ward wasn't fined or even talked about in this debacle...you know, since we're all enraged and looking out for the players health and whatnot. VIDEO or SCREENCAP1, SCREENCAP2, SCREENCAP3. He's a repeat offender too...

2. The entire country outside of Western PA thinks he's crying. You aren't going to convince anyone otherwise. He IS crying, like a little ##### in fact.3. That Youtube video shows nothing. Are you kidding me with that hit on Ben? And the second play: Hasn't it already been established that these hits do not apply to a runner, thus the reason the NFL isn't even talking about Harrison's hit on Cribbs?

This is pretty weak.

The hit on Mendenhall my friend. did you click the 3 screencaps? It was pretty clear if you took the time to read comprehend and click. The video you can FF to 56 seconds...I have no issue with the "hit" on Ben.

Did you read my whole post?!?! You obviously didn't "read comprehend and click".Wow. The apologists are in rare form this morning.

 

[Kosar]

Are Harrison's fanboys STILL crying yet because their mighty, mighty hero got a well-deserved penalty for being a dirty player?

I suppose this is aimed at Steelers fans so I will answer. The officials on the field did not think the hits were dirty or excessive -- Harrison wasn't penalized on either play. Look, the hitting was no different last week than it was 10 years ago. The main reason they're taking any action is to show they are being proactive in player safety which is certainly going to be an issue when they begin negotiating to expand the schedule to 18 games with the players association. They are also doing it to keep congress off their back.

That's very cynical, don't you think?

Actually, I have to agree about the NFL trying to parlay this into a negotiating point with the players. I'm sure both sides are going to try to use this situation to their advantage. I don't think it's the main reason by any means, but I'm sure it factors in.

 

[3nOut]

Just some random semi-related thoughts on the subject:

I think if the league made the players play just one game with the old-fashioned leather helmets the players would quickly learn how to hit and tackle differently.



People say that football has always been a rough sport, and yes it has. But through rule changes, equipment changes, changes in playcalling (more pass oriented than it used to be), and the changes in the health and size in players, the game has evolved. Through this evolution a lot of fundamentals may have been lost. Players hit more than they tackle for example.

Maybe even some of the rule changes over the years have inadvertently added to this issue. For example, maybe if the league didn't implement some of the rule changes keeping QBs safer, more passes would be incomplete and thus some of these plays would never have occured. Maybe?



Maybe coaches could avert some of these problems if they do not call plays that put these players in dangerous situations. Maybe they should coach better and teach their QBs NOT to deliver the ball to the QB if they see a defender making a b-line toward them.



Could the league fine Mike Martz for consistently putting Cutler in a dangerous situation?



Seems like a majority of players and coaches are against any rule changes saying that this is football and players understand that this is a tough game. They say that if players don't want to get hit, they should not play in the NFL. They say its a priveledge to play in the NFL and they knew what they were getting into. I wonder how many of these players will be saying the same thing when they want their contracts renegotiated because its a dangerous game (even they knew what they were getting into).



Mark Schlereth ranted about this on Mike and Mike this morning. He talked about how the league does not really care about the health of players. He cited the fact that if they did care, they would not have taken his insurance away two years after leaving the league. Well guess what Mark, I can't think of one person who maintained free insurance from ANY former employer after leaving the company. Welcome to the real world.



Schlereth continues by saying the league is hypocritical by fining players but thenb promoting, selling, and making a profit from big hiots by selling videos. I don't think its hypocritical if they are consistent in their message and they do not have any illegal hits in their videos (I'm not sure). The NFL, from my understanding, is not discouraging hitting hard (they still like that images), but are discouraging illegal hits to the head.

 

[Steeler]

just hit the receiver like this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqmdI3tVuMA

2. Hmmm... Could that be proof that there are more targets on the human body than the head and the knees?

Bush doesnt duck his head into his midsection area.

Exactly. If Bush has a split-second more time, he very wll could have ducked to get ready for the hit... increasing the potential for helmet to helmet contact. I just think the NFL should take that into consideration when levying fines or suspensions.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Are Harrison's fanboys STILL crying yet because their mighty, mighty hero got a well-deserved penalty for being a dirty player?

I suppose this is aimed at Steelers fans so I will answer. The officials on the field did not think the hits were dirty or excessive -- Harrison wasn't penalized on either play.

Kind of like how the officials didn't think Polamula made that INT against the Colts in the '05 playoffs, but the league came out and said that it was the incorrect call? Same thing here. The league, by fining him, is saying that his hit was cheap and dirty. Officials are not gonna make the correct calls 100% of the time on the field.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I may be the first and only Steeler fan to post this, but...He's a ridiculously good football player, and playing hard is NOT the same thing as playing dirty (he always does the former and sometimes the latter). But let's face it, this dude is an idiot.I understand the beef with the call and the fine - but I also can see the argument for the fine and what it is trying to accomplish. But in any case, threatening to retire over it is childish and counter-productive.I totally appreciate the INTENSITY of his play, but if you can't be effective without killing people, go ahead and retire.

he is an intense guy, he'll be fine when he calms down

Yeah, he'll be fine. It's all just for show of course. I just think there would be better ways to express his position than saying he can't play under the existing rules. It just comes off as whining, thereby WEAKENING his position. I think he has some valid points in some areas (as many have said, it may be very difficult to AVOID doing head-to-head in certain circumstances behind his control), but just man up already.IMO, Harrison always walks a fine line between intense and dirty. And when you walk that line like he does, sometimes you are going to get calls/fines that might be questionable. Just the price you pay for playing the way he does.Put it this way, if you asked me to name 5 guys who were most likely to kill someone on a football field, Harrison would be on that list. So I can't blame the NFL for trying to force a guy like that to take an extra split second to actively adjust his "target zone". That might reduce his effectiveness by a small amount, but as a Steeler fan, I can live with that. And I think he can too.I love big hits as much as the next guy and I have been THRILLED to see SOME of the punishment he has delivered, but I don't want to see a guy die as a result of one of those blasts any sooner than I have to (it will happen, just a matter of when and how often). If that makes me a #####, so be it.