Should James Harrison Be Suspended (1 Viewer)

[treat88]

Look, reasonable people who have read the exact rules quoted above have differing opinions.

That's why I specifically asked about legal vs illegal and not should vs should not. We all understand your vitriol towards the situation. That's fair.

At this point I am just trying to find out why people believe what they do and if either side has a compelling argument.

TO be honest....I don't know how ANYONE can watch that play and NOT think Harrison was head-hunting. The NFL has catch-all rules against "unnecesary roughness". Regardless of any other rule, or the letter of any other law...that hit was 1000% "unecesarily rough".Easy call...Easy fine......given the history and the boneheaded comments since...Easy suspension.

I do think Harrison was head-hunting. The question is if McCoy was deemed a runner is that illegal.From the 2011 NFL Rulebook

Section 12; Article 8 Unnecessary Roughness

This shall include, but will not be limited to:

(g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or

facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

(j) if a player illegally launches into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (1) leaves

both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (2) uses any part of his

helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) to initiate forcible contact against any

part of his opponent’s body.

Note: This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless

player, as defined in Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9.

2011 NFL Rulebook pg. 73These three portions of text and the accompanying note are the crux of the matter and I think clearly illustrate why things can be interpreted very differently.

 

[Wadsworth]

"If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily. Although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and facemask is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protecting those players who are in virtually defenseless postures..."

I am really not understanding the confusion.

 

[treat88]

"If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily. Although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and facemask is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protecting those players who are in virtually defenseless postures..."

I am really not understanding the confusion.

The bolded portion of the text is not included in the copy of the rule book I quoted. At least not in the section on unnecessary roughness and it is supposedly the 2011 version.Can you link your quote? Or did they remove the bolded from the 2011 version?

Additionally the bolded can be read as only applying to situations deemed ramming, butting, or spearing.

I really just want a definitive answer as to whether intentional helmet to helmet contact is typically legal against a runner.

 

[nxmehta]

I feel like we need another poll:

When the NFL suspends Harrison, will Steeler fans:

1. ##### and moan about how their team is being unfairly singled out.

2. Continue to argue that THEIR interpretation of the rules is correct, and the NFL head office is not interpreting its OWN RULES correctly.

3. Complain that the rules are for wussies and should be changed.

4. All of the above.

I would've put an option for "Admit that Harrison broke the rules and move on", but that doesn't seem likely. Waiting for BigSteelThrill to continue arguing that McCoy was a runner... Harrison could do this 10 more times and permanently be removed from NFL football for all eternity and the guy wouldn't admit he broke the rules. "But the guy he hit and put in the hospital didn't establish a passing posture!"

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I feel like we need another poll:When the NFL suspends Harrison, will Steeler fans:1. ##### and moan about how their team is being unfairly singled out.2. Continue to argue that THEIR interpretation of the rules is correct, and the NFL head office is not interpreting its OWN RULES correctly.3. Complain that the rules are for wussies and should be changed.4. All of the above.I would've put an option for "Admit that Harrison broke the rules and move on", but that doesn't seem likely. Waiting for BigSteelThrill to continue arguing that McCoy was a runner... Harrison could do this 10 more times and permanently be removed from NFL football for all eternity and the guy wouldn't admit he broke the rules. "But the guy he hit and put in the hospital didn't establish a passing posture!"

Way to stay personal.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

@AdamSchefter twitter.com

Adam Schefter

The sense in Pittsburgh and around the league is that the NFL will wind up suspending Steelers LB James Harrison on Tuesday morning.

 

[Short Corner]

This actually renews my dwindling hope, especially that Anderson quote. I hereby rescind my earlier post and am back to rooting for hurting people semi-legally.

Sorry to dash your hopes GB, but the Anderson quote is outdated...

So you're sure that the rules have changed since that interview? If the rules have changed since oct 2010, What was the rule before the change?

How is this relevant?

 

[Godsbrother]

@AdamSchefter twitter.com

Adam Schefter

The sense in Pittsburgh and around the league is that the NFL will wind up suspending Steelers LB James Harrison on Tuesday morning.

My guess is that Harrison will likely appeal with the hopes of putting it off until after the 49er game.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

This actually renews my dwindling hope, especially that Anderson quote. I hereby rescind my earlier post and am back to rooting for hurting people semi-legally.

Sorry to dash your hopes GB, but the Anderson quote is outdated...

So you're sure that the rules have changed since that interview? If the rules have changed since oct 2010, What was the rule before the change?

How is this relevant?

I didn't realize we were on the floor, counselor. I'm just curious to know how he's sure that interview from about a year ago is outdated info.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

@AdamSchefter twitter.com

Adam Schefter

The sense in Pittsburgh and around the league is that the NFL will wind up suspending Steelers LB James Harrison on Tuesday morning.

My guess is that Harrison will likely appeal with the hopes of putting it off until after the 49er game.

I am sure he will.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Offical -- One game suspension.

 

[renesauz]

I really just want a definitive answer as to whether intentional helmet to helmet contact is typically legal against a runner.

Better question...Don't you want it to be illegal? Shouldn't it be illegal? With all the focus on concussions and concussion-causing hits, do you really feel it necessary to over-analyze the letter of the law to determine whether this particular hit should be against the rules?You're trying to hard to defend your player.

 

[Godsbrother]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

whether it's an accurate feeling or not -- I hope this puts the team into persecution mode and really pisses them off.

 

[AmosMoses]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

 

[treat88]

I really just want a definitive answer as to whether intentional helmet to helmet contact is typically legal against a runner.

Better question...Don't you want it to be illegal? Shouldn't it be illegal? With all the focus on concussions and concussion-causing hits, do you really feel it necessary to over-analyze the letter of the law to determine whether this particular hit should be against the rules?You're trying to hard to defend your player.

You can read it that way if you like, but that's not the case at all.Here ya go, the hit that Harrison put on McCoy was illegal and intentional and I have zero problem with the suspension given both his history and his criticism of the commish.

I've already stated that I think intentional helmet to helmet contact should be a penalty against any player be they offensive or defensive; skill position or otherwise...but I also know that is neither the current rules nor how the game is called. I wish it were, but it's not. Hence the fine for roughing the passer...not unnecessary roughness. Hence the league explaining that McCoy was defenseless...not simply unnecessary roughness.

It is absolutely pertinent to the discussion to know the current state of the rules, and the reason you call it "over analysis" is because you don't have any clear grounds to state that, as it stands, intentional helmet to helmet contact against a runner is illegal. We can wish it were, but it's clearly not yet.

You are trying hard to push an agenda that isn't supported by the rules given league statements, precedent, and the rule book.

You can't really believe your own drivel about how it matters if you are upright or bent over or tall or short or a RB or a QB or a LB as to whether you should be legally exposed to intentional helmet to helmet hits? Can you? I don't believe that at all, but I also realize that what I want and what reality is doesn't match up perfectly. From your posts in this thread it doesn't appear that you do realize that.

What I want of the league is a clear, unambiguous rule that any intentional use of the helmet as a weapon be made illegal. Not just for QB's, or defenseless WR's...all players on both sides of the ball.

 

[Godsbrother]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

Thanks.Just so you are as outraged the next time Ray Lewis nails someone in the noggin.

 

[The_Man]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

Thanks.Just so you are as outraged the next time Ray Lewis nails someone in the noggin.

Serious question - have you looked at the Ray Lewis hit on Austin Collie that drew a $5,000 fine? I know you are trying to make a point, but the difference between this kind of play and the kind that earned Harrison a suspension is clear.

 

[AmosMoses]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

Thanks.Just so you are as outraged the next time Ray Lewis nails someone in the noggin.

My outrage regarding Harrison is zero, so yeah.

 

[belljr]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

Thanks.Just so you are as outraged the next time Ray Lewis nails someone in the noggin.

Serious question - have you looked at the Ray Lewis hit on Austin Collie that drew a $5,000 fine? I know you are trying to make a point, but the difference between this kind of play and the kind that earned Harrison a suspension is clear.

What about his hit on Ward this year?

 

[Godsbrother]

Offical -- One game suspension.

Well I guess that everyone here was right and I was wrong owned. Still don't understand how other "multiple offenders" get away with it but then this is Lord Goodell and he has never been very good at consistency.

FIXED

Thanks.Just so you are as outraged the next time Ray Lewis nails someone in the noggin.

Serious question - have you looked at the Ray Lewis hit on Austin Collie that drew a $5,000 fine? I know you are trying to make a point, but the difference between this kind of play and the kind that earned Harrison a suspension is clear.

Yes but it was considered helmet-to-helmet and he is a multiple offender. Take a look his shot on Chad Ochocinco in 2009 and his shot at Hines Ward earlier this season. They were intentional, violent and were helmet-to-helmet yet no warnings of suspension from the league office.Look I understand that Harrison's hit was egregious and worthy of a fine. Heck I don't have a problem with a suspension because the fines weren't changing his behavior. My problem is that if you are going to start suspending players for infractions during the course of a play then you better apply them to all players and not just idiots that mouth off about the commissioner.

 

[AmosMoses]

Any offenses against Hines Ward shouldn't be counted anyway. Go ask a police department how hard they investigate the murder of a gang member. It's the same thing.

 

[nxmehta]

Anyone still think that hit wasn't illegal?

 

[Cookiemonster]

Anyone still think that hit wasn't illegal?

Not many, if anybody in this thread was saying the hit wasn't illegal. We were discussing whether McCoy could be considered a runner at the time he was hit. Most of us agree that the way Harrison launched and dipped his helmet to nail McCoy was malicious and illegal if he were defined as a passer at this point. The rules differ however, at least the precedent for different enforcement of rules exist for a runner. I played many years as a MLB and SS and had a very physical style, and would have absolutely laid the QB out given the same situation even by today's rules, but I would have approached it in this way; I think had Harrison had his head up and made contact with the facemask 1st instead of the crown of the helmet, and had run through the tackle instead of launching himself, and had aimed at the ribs/sternum area instead of the chin, that he would have avoided the suspension. Maybe a fine would still be incurred, and the flag may still have been thrown. That's up for interpretation, but the suspension likely would not have happened had he not concussed McCoy.

 

[nxmehta]

Anyone still think that hit wasn't illegal?

Not many, if anybody in this thread was saying the hit wasn't illegal. We were discussing whether McCoy could be considered a runner at the time he was hit. Most of us agree that the way Harrison launched and dipped his helmet to nail McCoy was malicious and illegal if he were defined as a passer at this point. The rules differ however, at least the precedent for different enforcement of rules exist for a runner. I played many years as a MLB and SS and had a very physical style, and would have absolutely laid the QB out given the same situation even by today's rules, but I would have approached it in this way; I think had Harrison had his head up and made contact with the facemask 1st instead of the crown of the helmet, and had run through the tackle instead of launching himself, and had aimed at the ribs/sternum area instead of the chin, that he would have avoided the suspension. Maybe a fine would still be incurred, and the flag may still have been thrown. That's up for interpretation, but the suspension likely would not have happened had he not concussed McCoy.

The argument that I was hearing was that since McCoy was a runner, the hit wasn't illegal. If McCoy was a runner the hit would be legal (just like the hit Harrison put on Cribbs).

Which he does NOT clearly do, he clearly goes from PASSER to RUNNER (when he tucks the ball away and starts advancing the ball) to flipping the ball at the last second.

He never clearly established himself as passer again.

What I was asking more specifically was, do people still think McCoy was a runner?I agree that the suspension wouldn't have happened if hit wasn't as hard (even if it was still illegal) and if the hitter wasn't Harrison. Unfortunately he has long history of these kind of hits. He's not the only one (someone else brought up Ray Lewis, good example), but he has the most severe history.

 

[Cookiemonster]

What I was asking more specifically was, do people still think McCoy was a runner?I agree that the suspension wouldn't have happened if hit wasn't as hard (even if it was still illegal) and if the hitter wasn't Harrison. Unfortunately he has long history of these kind of hits. He's not the only one (someone else brought up Ray Lewis, good example), but he has the most severe history.

I think the argument could be made that he was a threat to advance the ball. I knew Harrison would be handed a hefty fine at the minimum, but that's just as much to do with the fact that it's Harrison. Were it Sean Lee, he may likely have been given the benefit of the doubt and the only punishment would have been the 15 yards. There was an out to use, but I think Harrison closed that door with the style of hit he made, and his reputation/history. We as Steelers fans, wanted to discuss the possible out and keep our hopes up about losing him for a game or more. With the "who" and the "how" already covered, it was really only a matter of "when."

 

[Black Sunday]

What gets me is the fact that it's really ONLY Harrison that is being treated in this manner.

Thanksgiving - Matthews takes 2 steps and hits Stafford with a crushing blow while he's in the pocket and doesn't draw a flag. But Matthews is a golden boy, so they have a vested interest in keeping his image clean.

Richard Seymour has been ejected 3 times - you don't hear anything.

Kam Chancellor has drawn 3 fines for hitting defenseless receivers this year and no one complains.

Dunta Robinson, who like Harrison, was fined last year for illegal hits and is considered a repeat offender, knocked Jeremy Maclin into next week earlier in the season. He drew a fine, but no suspension.

James Harrison hits McCoy in a situation that is clearly arguable whether he had enough time to make the proper adjustment and you would think he pulled a gun on someone (oh wait.. that was Rolando McClain, who also received no disciplinary action so far.)

Harrison and the Steelers have embraced aggressive defensive play, hard hits, etc... for 30+ years. During that time period, they have been held up as the model defensive team. Now, at the flip of a switch, they are "dirty" and used as an example of all that is wrong in the NFL. Harrison was DPOY in 2008.

The NFL has set Harrison up as the bad guy here. Further, the NFL has artificially manufactured the negative image of Harrison by focusing more on his hits than on others. A couple questionable hits and resulting fines (in fairness, some were deserved) create a "history", which is then used to justify more questionable fines and penalties in cases that would not draw a fine if other players were involved.

This is not to say that Harrison doesn't need to change his style of play. He clearly does, but there HAS to be some recognition that he has made huge efforts to change this year, and that in this example, there IS an argument to be made that McCoy was a runner and at the last second, wasn't. Yes, this hit deserved a flag and a review, but I would feel much better about the league's process if they showed some recognition of efforts made.

It's clear that the rules do not apply equally to all players. THAT is what is most upsetting. If you're going to enforce the rules, they need to be enforced across the board.

 

[cvnpoka]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

 

[Black Sunday]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

Haters need to learn the difference between spearing and leading with the helmet. Although they sound similar, there is a clear distinction. Harrison did not spear McCoy. He DID lead with his helmet, which under the circumstances is wrong. I don't disagree there. I do disagree that it's as clear cut as the haters want to say it is. Haters also need to understand that helmet to helmet collisions occur on every play. Lineman clash. Running backs are frequently leaning into tackles with their helmet while often competing with the defender to see who can get lower for leverage, so when they go head to head with a defender who's also leading with the helmet, it's fair play. Helmet to helmet against running backs is 100% clean. McCoy was a running back while that ball was tucked.

 

[CalBear]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

Haters need to learn the difference between spearing and leading with the helmet. Although they sound similar, there is a clear distinction. Harrison did not spear McCoy. He DID lead with his helmet, which under the circumstances is wrong. I don't disagree there. I do disagree that it's as clear cut as the haters want to say it is. Haters also need to understand that helmet to helmet collisions occur on every play. Lineman clash. Running backs are frequently leaning into tackles with their helmet while often competing with the defender to see who can get lower for leverage, so when they go head to head with a defender who's also leading with the helmet, it's fair play. Helmet to helmet against running backs is 100% clean. McCoy was a running back while that ball was tucked.

Would you please drop the "hater" shtick? I don't hate the Steelers or Harrison. I do think that Harrison clearly and intentionally tried to blow up McCoy when he could see that the ball was going to be gone. And it's not the first time he's done it. And for all the talk about putting skirts on the players, I think Harrison and other defenders get away with those kinds of hits a lot more often than they're called for them.

 

[Black Sunday]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

Haters need to learn the difference between spearing and leading with the helmet. Although they sound similar, there is a clear distinction. Harrison did not spear McCoy. He DID lead with his helmet, which under the circumstances is wrong. I don't disagree there. I do disagree that it's as clear cut as the haters want to say it is. Haters also need to understand that helmet to helmet collisions occur on every play. Lineman clash. Running backs are frequently leaning into tackles with their helmet while often competing with the defender to see who can get lower for leverage, so when they go head to head with a defender who's also leading with the helmet, it's fair play. Helmet to helmet against running backs is 100% clean. McCoy was a running back while that ball was tucked.

Would you please drop the "hater" shtick? I don't hate the Steelers or Harrison. I do think that Harrison clearly and intentionally tried to blow up McCoy when he could see that the ball was going to be gone. And it's not the first time he's done it. And for all the talk about putting skirts on the players, I think Harrison and other defenders get away with those kinds of hits a lot more often than they're called for them.

As to your bolded, I don't disagree. It's not a pillow fight. What I would like for you to understand is that while that ball was tucked, McCoy was fair game, and it would have been 99% clean for Harrison to blow him up. For one, if he was a runner, he wouldn't have run straight into Harrison like he did, he would have made a move, and Harrison has to assume that the runner is going to Juke or something, so the smartest play is to go straight for center mass and hope for the best. And I do think that he probably had time to recognize that McCoy threw the ball.. BUT it's not cut and dry. Things are moving pretty fast. The players don't have the benefit of watching it 50 times in slow motion to figure out exactly what they should do.

It's easy to say he should have pulled up when all you see is the last 2 steps of a 15 second play. Was he 100% innocent here -- absolutely not. I'm just saying that it's not black and white either and the league should recognize that.

 

[mad sweeney]

What gets me is the fact that it's really ONLY Harrison that is being treated in this manner. Thanksgiving - Matthews takes 2 steps and hits Stafford with a crushing blow while he's in the pocket and doesn't draw a flag. But Matthews is a golden boy, so they have a vested interest in keeping his image clean. Richard Seymour has been ejected 3 times - you don't hear anything.Kam Chancellor has drawn 3 fines for hitting defenseless receivers this year and no one complains.Dunta Robinson, who like Harrison, was fined last year for illegal hits and is considered a repeat offender, knocked Jeremy Maclin into next week earlier in the season. He drew a fine, but no suspension.James Harrison hits McCoy in a situation that is clearly arguable whether he had enough time to make the proper adjustment and you would think he pulled a gun on someone (oh wait.. that was Rolando McClain, who also received no disciplinary action so far.)Harrison and the Steelers have embraced aggressive defensive play, hard hits, etc... for 30+ years. During that time period, they have been held up as the model defensive team. Now, at the flip of a switch, they are "dirty" and used as an example of all that is wrong in the NFL. Harrison was DPOY in 2008.The NFL has set Harrison up as the bad guy here. Further, the NFL has artificially manufactured the negative image of Harrison by focusing more on his hits than on others. A couple questionable hits and resulting fines (in fairness, some were deserved) create a "history", which is then used to justify more questionable fines and penalties in cases that would not draw a fine if other players were involved. This is not to say that Harrison doesn't need to change his style of play. He clearly does, but there HAS to be some recognition that he has made huge efforts to change this year, and that in this example, there IS an argument to be made that McCoy was a runner and at the last second, wasn't. Yes, this hit deserved a flag and a review, but I would feel much better about the league's process if they showed some recognition of efforts made.It's clear that the rules do not apply equally to all players. THAT is what is most upsetting. If you're going to enforce the rules, they need to be enforced across the board.

Harrison's doing the job himself of making him out to be the bad guy. If he wasn't such an ### about it all, maybe he'd garner some sympathy, but he's doing everything in his power to make everyone but blind Steeler homers think he's the bad guy. Oh, plus the fact that he's a complete head hunter. The hit on McCoy was nothing less than a deliberate and successful attempt to hit a player in the face with the top of his helmet. Period. Hard hitting is great and when it's bang-bang (like both of Robinson's) then there's gray area to defend yourself with. Sure, hard hitters are going to get some flags and even once in awhile something that looks as bad as Lewis on Ward, or Ward on Reed (unflagged of course since Ward gets away with it). And then there are guys like Harrison and Merriweather that deliberately go for the head. When they stop doing that and still get flagged/fined/suspended, then you poor, unfairly treated Steelers can complain. Until then, why don't you go back to telling Seattle fans how silly it is to complain about the NFL's perceived bias for the Steelers.Also, try not to blast the Commish and league and pose with a bunch of guns a few weeks before you go head hunting, that will help.

 

[HellToupee]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

You need to learn what spearing is according to the NFL

 

[CalBear]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

Haters need to learn the difference between spearing and leading with the helmet. Although they sound similar, there is a clear distinction. Harrison did not spear McCoy. He DID lead with his helmet, which under the circumstances is wrong. I don't disagree there. I do disagree that it's as clear cut as the haters want to say it is. Haters also need to understand that helmet to helmet collisions occur on every play. Lineman clash. Running backs are frequently leaning into tackles with their helmet while often competing with the defender to see who can get lower for leverage, so when they go head to head with a defender who's also leading with the helmet, it's fair play. Helmet to helmet against running backs is 100% clean. McCoy was a running back while that ball was tucked.

Would you please drop the "hater" shtick? I don't hate the Steelers or Harrison. I do think that Harrison clearly and intentionally tried to blow up McCoy when he could see that the ball was going to be gone. And it's not the first time he's done it. And for all the talk about putting skirts on the players, I think Harrison and other defenders get away with those kinds of hits a lot more often than they're called for them.

As to your bolded, I don't disagree. It's not a pillow fight. What I would like for you to understand is that while that ball was tucked, McCoy was fair game, and it would have been 99% clean for Harrison to blow him up.

Basically, yes.

For one, if he was a runner, he wouldn't have run straight into Harrison like he did, he would have made a move, and Harrison has to assume that the runner is going to Juke or something, so the smartest play is to go straight for center mass and hope for the best.

Well, the smartest play is to stay on your assignment, which is the RB in the flat, and thereby prevent the first down. The second-smartest play is to keep your head up so you can react to the juke and protect yourself from injury (more defenders are injured from helmet-to-helmet contact than offensive players are).

 

[Statcruncher]

steeler fans just continue to argue a non sequitor. doesnt matter if hes a runner or not. you cant spear an opponent.

You need to learn what spearing is according to the NFL

There are a few parts in the NFL rulebook that are an interesting read:

UNNECESSARY ROUGHNESS

Article 8 There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to:

(g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/"hairline" parts) or

facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

According to this it appears that regardless of what call was made on the field, Harrison clearly violated the butt, spear, or ram clause of this rule.

ROUGHING THE PASSER

Article 13 Because the act of passing often puts the quarterback (or any other player attempting a pass) in

a position where he is particularly vulnerable to injury, special rules against roughing the passer apply. The

Referee has principal responsibility for enforcing these rules. Any physical acts against passers during or

just after a pass which, in the Referee's judgment, are unwarranted by the circumstances of the play will

be called as fouls. The Referee will be guided by the following principles:

PASS LEAVING PASSER'S HAND; ONE-STEP RULE

(1) Roughing will be called if, in the Referee's judgment, a pass rusher clearly should have known that the

ball had already left the passer's hand before contact was made; pass rushers are responsible for

being aware of the position of the ball in passing situations; the Referee will use the release of the ball

from the passer's hand as his guideline that the passer is now fully protected; once a pass has been

released by a passer, a rushing defender may make direct contact with the passer only up through

the rusher's first step after such release (prior to second step hitting the ground); thereafter the rusher

must be making an attempt to avoid contact and must not continue to "drive through" or otherwise

forcibly contact the passer; incidental or inadvertent contact by a player who is easing up or being

blocked into the passer will not be considered significant.

UNNECESSARY ACTS AGAINST PASSER

(2) A rushing defender is prohibited from committing such intimidating and punishing acts as "stuffing" a

passer into the ground or unnecessarily wrestling or driving him down after the passer has thrown the

ball, even if the rusher makes his initial contact with the passer within the one-step limitation provided

for in (1) above. When tackling a passer who is in a defenseless posture (e.g., during or just after

throwing a pass), a defensive player must not unnecessarily or violently throw him down and land on

top of him with all or most of the defender's weight. Instead, the defensive player must strive to wrap

up or cradle the passer with the defensive player's arms.

HITS TO PASSER'S HEAD AND USE OF HELMET AND FACEMASK

(3) In covering the passer position, Referees will be particularly alert to fouls in which defenders

impermissibly use the helmet and/or facemask to hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of

the body to hit the passer forcibly in the head or neck area (see also the other unnecessary-roughness

rules covering these subjects). A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in

a defenseless posture for example, (a) forcibly hitting the passer's head or neck area with the helmet

or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by

encircling or grasping him, or (b) lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or

forehead/"hairline" parts of the helmet against any part of the passer's body. This rule does not

prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a

conventional tackle on a passer.

CLUBBING PASSER'S ARM

(4) A defensive player is prohibited from clubbing the arm of a passer during a pass or just after a pass

has been thrown; however, a defensive player may grasp, pull, or otherwise make normal contact with

a passer's arm in attempting to tackle him;

HITTING PASSER'S KNEE

(5) A rushing defender is prohibited from forcibly hitting in the knee area or below a passer who has one

or both feet on the ground, even if the initial contact is above the knee. It is not a foul if the defender is

blocked (or fouled) into the passer and has no opportunity to avoid him;

Note 1: A defender cannot initiate a roll or lunge and forcibly hit the passer in the knee area or below, even if he

is being contacted by another player.

Note 2: It is not a foul if the defender swipes, wraps, or grabs a passer in the knee area or below in an attempt

to tackle him.

GRASP AND CONTROL

(6) The Referee must blow the play dead as soon as the passer is clearly in the grasp and control of any

tackler behind the line, and the passer's safety is in jeopardy.











PASSER OUT OF THE PLAY

(7) A passer who is standing still or fading backwards after the ball has left his hand is obviously out of

the play and must not be unnecessarily contacted by the defense through the end of the play or until

the passer becomes a blocker, or until he becomes a runner upon taking a lateral from a teammate or

picking up a loose ball, or, in the event of a change of possession on the play, until the passer

assumes a distinctly defensive position. However, at any time after the change of possession, it is a

foul if (a) an opponent forcibly hits the quarterback's head or neck area with his helmet, facemask,

forearm, or shoulder, or (b) if an opponent lowers his head and makes forcible contact with the

top/crown or forehead/"hairline" parts of his helmet against any part of the quarterback's body. This

provision (b) does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or the helmet in the course of a

conventional block.

PASSER OUT OF THE POCKET

(8) When the passer goes outside the pocket area and either continues moving with the ball (without

attempting to advance the ball as a runner) or throws while on the run, he loses the protection of the

one-step rule provided for in (1) above, and the protection against a low hit provided for in (5) above,

but he remains covered by all the other special protections afforded to a passer in the pocket

(numbers 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7), as well as the regular unnecessary-roughness rules applicable to all player

positions. If the passer stops behind the line and clearly establishes a passing posture, he will then be

covered by all of the special protections for passers.

Again, regardless of whether you call McCoy defenseless or not it doesn't matter. According to the NFL rulebook Harrison applied an illegal hit. He's a cheap shot artist and IMO he's lucky he only got 1 game. Are there more cheap shot artists out there who need suspensions? Sure. But because they all haven't been punished doesn't mean Harrison should get off free.

 

[Black Sunday]

What gets me is the fact that it's really ONLY Harrison that is being treated in this manner.

Thanksgiving - Matthews takes 2 steps and hits Stafford with a crushing blow while he's in the pocket and doesn't draw a flag. But Matthews is a golden boy, so they have a vested interest in keeping his image clean.

Richard Seymour has been ejected 3 times - you don't hear anything.

Kam Chancellor has drawn 3 fines for hitting defenseless receivers this year and no one complains.

Dunta Robinson, who like Harrison, was fined last year for illegal hits and is considered a repeat offender, knocked Jeremy Maclin into next week earlier in the season. He drew a fine, but no suspension.

James Harrison hits McCoy in a situation that is clearly arguable whether he had enough time to make the proper adjustment and you would think he pulled a gun on someone (oh wait.. that was Rolando McClain, who also received no disciplinary action so far.)

Harrison and the Steelers have embraced aggressive defensive play, hard hits, etc... for 30+ years. During that time period, they have been held up as the model defensive team. Now, at the flip of a switch, they are "dirty" and used as an example of all that is wrong in the NFL. Harrison was DPOY in 2008.

The NFL has set Harrison up as the bad guy here. Further, the NFL has artificially manufactured the negative image of Harrison by focusing more on his hits than on others. A couple questionable hits and resulting fines (in fairness, some were deserved) create a "history", which is then used to justify more questionable fines and penalties in cases that would not draw a fine if other players were involved.

This is not to say that Harrison doesn't need to change his style of play. He clearly does, but there HAS to be some recognition that he has made huge efforts to change this year, and that in this example, there IS an argument to be made that McCoy was a runner and at the last second, wasn't. Yes, this hit deserved a flag and a review, but I would feel much better about the league's process if they showed some recognition of efforts made.

It's clear that the rules do not apply equally to all players. THAT is what is most upsetting. If you're going to enforce the rules, they need to be enforced across the board.

Harrison's doing the job himself of making him out to be the bad guy. If he wasn't such an ### about it all, maybe he'd garner some sympathy, but he's doing everything in his power to make everyone but blind Steeler homers think he's the bad guy. Oh, plus the fact that he's a complete head hunter. The hit on McCoy was nothing less than a deliberate and successful attempt to hit a player in the face with the top of his helmet. Period. Hard hitting is great and when it's bang-bang (like both of Robinson's) then there's gray area to defend yourself with. Sure, hard hitters are going to get some flags and even once in awhile something that looks as bad as Lewis on Ward, or Ward on Reed (unflagged of course since Ward gets away with it). And then there are guys like Harrison and Merriweather that deliberately go for the head. When they stop doing that and still get flagged/fined/suspended, then you poor, unfairly treated Steelers can complain. Until then, why don't you go back to telling Seattle fans how silly it is to complain about the NFL's perceived bias for the Steelers.Also, try not to blast the Commish and league and pose with a bunch of guns a few weeks before you go head hunting, that will help.

I just realized I am in the Shark Pool. Suddently, I feel the need for a shower.

 

[Cookiemonster]

What gets me is the fact that it's really ONLY Harrison that is being treated in this manner.

Thanksgiving - Matthews takes 2 steps and hits Stafford with a crushing blow while he's in the pocket and doesn't draw a flag. But Matthews is a golden boy, so they have a vested interest in keeping his image clean.

Richard Seymour has been ejected 3 times - you don't hear anything.

Kam Chancellor has drawn 3 fines for hitting defenseless receivers this year and no one complains.

Dunta Robinson, who like Harrison, was fined last year for illegal hits and is considered a repeat offender, knocked Jeremy Maclin into next week earlier in the season. He drew a fine, but no suspension.

James Harrison hits McCoy in a situation that is clearly arguable whether he had enough time to make the proper adjustment and you would think he pulled a gun on someone (oh wait.. that was Rolando McClain, who also received no disciplinary action so far.)

Harrison and the Steelers have embraced aggressive defensive play, hard hits, etc... for 30+ years. During that time period, they have been held up as the model defensive team. Now, at the flip of a switch, they are "dirty" and used as an example of all that is wrong in the NFL. Harrison was DPOY in 2008.

The NFL has set Harrison up as the bad guy here. Further, the NFL has artificially manufactured the negative image of Harrison by focusing more on his hits than on others. A couple questionable hits and resulting fines (in fairness, some were deserved) create a "history", which is then used to justify more questionable fines and penalties in cases that would not draw a fine if other players were involved.

This is not to say that Harrison doesn't need to change his style of play. He clearly does, but there HAS to be some recognition that he has made huge efforts to change this year, and that in this example, there IS an argument to be made that McCoy was a runner and at the last second, wasn't. Yes, this hit deserved a flag and a review, but I would feel much better about the league's process if they showed some recognition of efforts made.

It's clear that the rules do not apply equally to all players. THAT is what is most upsetting. If you're going to enforce the rules, they need to be enforced across the board.

Harrison's doing the job himself of making him out to be the bad guy. If he wasn't such an ### about it all, maybe he'd garner some sympathy, but he's doing everything in his power to make everyone but blind Steeler homers think he's the bad guy. Oh, plus the fact that he's a complete head hunter. The hit on McCoy was nothing less than a deliberate and successful attempt to hit a player in the face with the top of his helmet. Period. Hard hitting is great and when it's bang-bang (like both of Robinson's) then there's gray area to defend yourself with. Sure, hard hitters are going to get some flags and even once in awhile something that looks as bad as Lewis on Ward, or Ward on Reed (unflagged of course since Ward gets away with it). And then there are guys like Harrison and Merriweather that deliberately go for the head. When they stop doing that and still get flagged/fined/suspended, then you poor, unfairly treated Steelers can complain. Until then, why don't you go back to telling Seattle fans how silly it is to complain about the NFL's perceived bias for the Steelers.

Also, try not to blast the Commish and league and pose with a bunch of guns a few weeks before you go head hunting, that will help.

I'm sure many Steeler fans defend Harrison to the point of blind homerism. There have been many posts in this thread by some of the most well-spoken, intelligent and unbiased Steelers fans on these boards, most of whom were not complaining but trying to discuss rules/interpretations with other posters on the board. Guys like you who go out of their way to insult the Pittsburgh team and their supporters only fan the flame war, and help make a good discussion thread less informative, less enjoyable and less readable. We all agree that Harrison was pushing his allowance to nail Colt in the head, but we can also talk about some of his less-blatant fouls which lead to his poor reputation such as the Brees hit. Nobody is going to argue that Harrison is a nice guy, or that he isn't digging his own grave, not only with his play but even more so every time he opens his self-centered, egotistical, ignorant mouth. I can agree with pretty much everything you've said in this post, except the antagonistic way you talked about the Steelers fans posting in this thread. Yes, there have been a couple that 95% of the posters in this thread can call a blind homer, but I'd say the vast majority have been responsible, respectful and only playing "what if" or devil's advocate. Your post would have been a good one, if you hadn't sounded so much like Harrison yourself.

 

[mad sweeney]

What gets me is the fact that it's really ONLY Harrison that is being treated in this manner.

Thanksgiving - Matthews takes 2 steps and hits Stafford with a crushing blow while he's in the pocket and doesn't draw a flag. But Matthews is a golden boy, so they have a vested interest in keeping his image clean.

Richard Seymour has been ejected 3 times - you don't hear anything.

Kam Chancellor has drawn 3 fines for hitting defenseless receivers this year and no one complains.

Dunta Robinson, who like Harrison, was fined last year for illegal hits and is considered a repeat offender, knocked Jeremy Maclin into next week earlier in the season. He drew a fine, but no suspension.

James Harrison hits McCoy in a situation that is clearly arguable whether he had enough time to make the proper adjustment and you would think he pulled a gun on someone (oh wait.. that was Rolando McClain, who also received no disciplinary action so far.)

Harrison and the Steelers have embraced aggressive defensive play, hard hits, etc... for 30+ years. During that time period, they have been held up as the model defensive team. Now, at the flip of a switch, they are "dirty" and used as an example of all that is wrong in the NFL. Harrison was DPOY in 2008.

The NFL has set Harrison up as the bad guy here. Further, the NFL has artificially manufactured the negative image of Harrison by focusing more on his hits than on others. A couple questionable hits and resulting fines (in fairness, some were deserved) create a "history", which is then used to justify more questionable fines and penalties in cases that would not draw a fine if other players were involved.

This is not to say that Harrison doesn't need to change his style of play. He clearly does, but there HAS to be some recognition that he has made huge efforts to change this year, and that in this example, there IS an argument to be made that McCoy was a runner and at the last second, wasn't. Yes, this hit deserved a flag and a review, but I would feel much better about the league's process if they showed some recognition of efforts made.

It's clear that the rules do not apply equally to all players. THAT is what is most upsetting. If you're going to enforce the rules, they need to be enforced across the board.

Harrison's doing the job himself of making him out to be the bad guy. If he wasn't such an ### about it all, maybe he'd garner some sympathy, but he's doing everything in his power to make everyone but blind Steeler homers think he's the bad guy. Oh, plus the fact that he's a complete head hunter. The hit on McCoy was nothing less than a deliberate and successful attempt to hit a player in the face with the top of his helmet. Period. Hard hitting is great and when it's bang-bang (like both of Robinson's) then there's gray area to defend yourself with. Sure, hard hitters are going to get some flags and even once in awhile something that looks as bad as Lewis on Ward, or Ward on Reed (unflagged of course since Ward gets away with it). And then there are guys like Harrison and Merriweather that deliberately go for the head. When they stop doing that and still get flagged/fined/suspended, then you poor, unfairly treated Steelers can complain. Until then, why don't you go back to telling Seattle fans how silly it is to complain about the NFL's perceived bias for the Steelers.

Also, try not to blast the Commish and league and pose with a bunch of guns a few weeks before you go head hunting, that will help.

I'm sure many Steeler fans defend Harrison to the point of blind homerism. There have been many posts in this thread by some of the most well-spoken, intelligent and unbiased Steelers fans on these boards, most of whom were not complaining but trying to discuss rules/interpretations with other posters on the board. Guys like you who go out of their way to insult the Pittsburgh team and their supporters only fan the flame war, and help make a good discussion thread less informative, less enjoyable and less readable. We all agree that Harrison was pushing his allowance to nail Colt in the head, but we can also talk about some of his less-blatant fouls which lead to his poor reputation such as the Brees hit. Nobody is going to argue that Harrison is a nice guy, or that he isn't digging his own grave, not only with his play but even more so every time he opens his self-centered, egotistical, ignorant mouth. I can agree with pretty much everything you've said in this post, except the antagonistic way you talked about the Steelers fans posting in this thread. Yes, there have been a couple that 95% of the posters in this thread can call a blind homer, but I'd say the vast majority have been responsible, respectful and only playing "what if" or devil's advocate. Your post would have been a good one, if you hadn't sounded so much like Harrison yourself.

The main quote in the post I replied to said that the league was making Harrison out to be the bad guy. So all of your writing about Steeler fans and their beliefs go out the window, because the Steeler fan I was responding to is in the small percentage of people who fall under the blind homer (at least in this matter) label. If you don't fit the label of blind homer, then it wasn't addressed to you.

 

[Bird]

Appeal denied......no Harrison in SF on Monday

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7359537/one-game-ban-james-harrison-pittsburgh-steelers-upheld

 

[Godsbrother]

Appeal denied......no Harrison in SF on Mondayhttp://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7359537/one-game-ban-james-harrison-pittsburgh-steelers-upheld

Huge break for the 49ers here. The Steelers are pretty thin at LB right now with Harrison and Chris Carter out and Woodley limited. Also Polamalu, Roethlisberger and Pouncey were not in practice yesterday.

 

[Steeler]

The hit on McCoy clearly deserved a fine given the current rules in the NFL.

However, I'm wondering if anyone thinks the suspension was over the top? As R. Clark pointed out, this was the first fine of the season for Harrison, which could mean he is trying to change the way he plays and stay within the rules. How much time has to pass before the impact of those past transgressions is diminished? Will those past fines ever be forgotten? What if he doesn't get another fine until the 2014 season? Automatically suspended for 2 games because he's a repeat offender?

 

[Godsbrother]

The hit on McCoy clearly deserved a fine given the current rules in the NFL. However, I'm wondering if anyone thinks the suspension was over the top? As R. Clark pointed out, this was the first fine of the season for Harrison, which could mean he is trying to change the way he plays and stay within the rules. How much time has to pass before the impact of those past transgressions is diminished? Will those past fines ever be forgotten? What if he doesn't get another fine until the 2014 season? Automatically suspended for 2 games because he's a repeat offender?

I don't think there is an answer to your questions. The league office levies fines and suspensions on a case-by-case basis and I don't see that changing. The seemingly lack of consistency can be frustrating to players and fans but that is the way it is.One thing is for sure: Harrison (and Clark) better be very careful in the future.

 

[Bogeys]

The hit on McCoy clearly deserved a fine given the current rules in the NFL.

However, I'm wondering if anyone thinks the suspension was over the top? As R. Clark pointed out, this was the first fine of the season for Harrison, which could mean he is trying to change the way he plays and stay within the rules. How much time has to pass before the impact of those past transgressions is diminished? Will those past fines ever be forgotten? What if he doesn't get another fine until the 2014 season? Automatically suspended for 2 games because he's a repeat offender?

I have nothing to back it up other than my opinion...but I don't think this has as much to do with the past hits, it has to do with his mouthing off about Roger G and the hit was the excuse. He is a marked man for his comments even more than his hits.

*Not saying it wasn't a fine worthy hit or his past ones haven't been, just that IMO he is being made an example of because of he pissed the Commish off.

 

[bucksoh]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problem

along with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been

a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

 

[CalBear]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problemalong with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

Yeah, because nothing makes football more enjoyable than having good players on the sidelines, and out of the league prematurely, due to stupid headhunting hits that have nothing to do with the game.

 

[Steelfan7]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problem

along with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been

a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

Yeah, because nothing makes football more enjoyable than having good players on the sidelines, and out of the league prematurely, due to stupid headhunting hits that have nothing to do with the game.

Colt McCoy a good player?

 

[geoff8695]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problem

along with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been

a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

Yeah, because nothing makes football more enjoyable than having good players on the sidelines, and out of the league prematurely, due to stupid headhunting hits that have nothing to do with the game.

Colt McCoy a good player?

Pretend the defender was DonkeyKong Sue and the QB was Big Ben. Would you still be laughing?Ben is a legit franchise QB and I love his toughness, but he also exposes himself to more potential injuries and kill shots than just about anyone I can think of. If the NFL wasn't trying to protect the QB so much, Ben might be dead by now.

But go ahead and laugh it up as long as it isn't your team's starting QB on the receiving end...

 

[treat88]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problem

along with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been

a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

Yeah, because nothing makes football more enjoyable than having good players on the sidelines, and out of the league prematurely, due to stupid headhunting hits that have nothing to do with the game.

Colt McCoy a good player?

Pretend the defender was DonkeyKong Sue and the QB was Big Ben. Would you still be laughing?Ben is a legit franchise QB and I love his toughness, but he also exposes himself to more potential injuries and kill shots than just about anyone I can think of. If the NFL wasn't trying to protect the QB so much, Ben might be dead by now.

But go ahead and laugh it up as long as it isn't your team's starting QB on the receiving end...

Of all the QB's in the league, Roethlisberger likely benefits the least from the NFL's "protection".

 

[mr roboto]

To the ones who voted yes, are any of you over 40??? Hell even 35? Hits like this was football years ago. You're part of the problemalong with Goodell. Hits like these is what made the league in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, early part of 90s. Does anyone really think this would have been a flag then, better yet suspension? Get Real!! I need a Beer! But the people you voted yes, stop watching football, and go F-yourselfs. Watch Soccer.

With your grammar I don't think you need a beer.