Should James Harrison Be Suspended (1 Viewer)

[Jagov]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I think you accurately present one side of the argument.

Just my side of it ... I am not looking to convert or convince others

 

[Cookiemonster]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I think you accurately present one side of the argument.EDIT: And I agree that in that situation Harrison should light up McCoy and make him think about it the next time he decides to scramble. I disagree that he should drop his head and use his helmet to try and knock McCoy out. Harrison could have delivered a viscous, yet clearly legal hit to McCoy.

Suh has already been fined a couple times for this.

 

[Wadsworth]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I think you accurately present one side of the argument.EDIT: And I agree that in that situation Harrison should light up McCoy and make him think about it the next time he decides to scramble. I disagree that he should drop his head and use his helmet to try and knock McCoy out. Harrison could have delivered a viscous, yet clearly legal hit to McCoy.

Suh has already been fined a couple times for this.

Good point. I do agree that League needs to be more consistent with it's fines and that that gap of misunderstanding has slowed the players acceptance of the direction the League is attempting to take.

 

[treat88]

heres a hint: nfl players arent perfectly rational entities. esp "in the heat of battle."

Without helmets they may surprise you with their clarity of thought re:using their head as a spear into another guys head.

The accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

You seem to want to frame this argument as those who want to see players protected vs those who want to see players injured, when that is not the root of the discussion at all.The question is, if all helmet to helmet contact should be illegal, why not simply write an unambiguous rule? Why does the league go through the machinations of defenseless vs non-defenseless? Why do they try to delineate the use of the helmet in butting, ramming, and spearing vs. routine tackling situations?At this point in time, again rightly or wrongly, it absolutely makes a difference as to whether a player is deemed a ballcarrier or defenseless.

 

[renesauz]

heres a hint: nfl players arent perfectly rational entities. esp "in the heat of battle."

Without helmets they may surprise you with their clarity of thought re:using their head as a spear into another guys head.

The accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I think you accurately present one side of the argument.EDIT: And I agree that in that situation Harrison should light up McCoy and make him think about it the next time he decides to scramble. I disagree that he should drop his head and use his helmet to try and knock McCoy out. Harrison could have delivered a viscous, yet clearly legal hit to McCoy.

Suh has already been fined a couple times for this.

Good point. I do agree that League needs to be more consistent with it's fines and that that gap of misunderstanding has slowed the players acceptance of the direction the League is attempting to take.

Hell, this is flag worthy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv1f37dVNZ8&feature=player_embedded what a wonderful play by London.

 

[renesauz]

heres a hint: nfl players arent perfectly rational entities. esp "in the heat of battle."

Without helmets they may surprise you with their clarity of thought re:using their head as a spear into another guys head.

The accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

You seem to want to frame this argument as those who want to see players protected vs those who want to see players injured, when that is not the root of the discussion at all.The question is, if all helmet to helmet contact should be illegal, why not simply write an unambiguous rule? Why does the league go through the machinations of defenseless vs non-defenseless? Why do they try to delineate the use of the helmet in butting, ramming, and spearing vs. routine tackling situations?At this point in time, again rightly or wrongly, it absolutely makes a difference as to whether a player is deemed a ballcarrier or defenseless.

Because the game DOES happen quickly...some ambiguity is necessary or the game would suffer. Some "judgement" is required on the part of the officials.Look...there've been times when the flag has been thrown and I felt like the defender did no wrong. Some of the flags QB's in the pocket draw are just plain ridiculous. The NFL is horribly inconsistant and Goodell is screwing the whole thing up. I agree with that much. BUT...and this is a big BUT, H2H hits of the kind Harrison laid on McCoy are completely and 100% un-necessary. H2H hits that are clearly and easily avoidable deserve not just a flag, but a hefty fine and suspension (for repeat offenders). Harrison lined McCoy up, and PURPOSEFULLY TARGETTED his melon. Admitting he did so because "he's a runner..I'm allowed to" just shows what an idiot he really is...he really doesn't care if someone gets hurt or killed. It is his attitude, not Goodell's bad job implementing new safety rules, that will ruin the game in the end.

 

[mad sweeney]

The accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.

Comparing your experience in a recreation rugby league to the NFL is like comparing my beer league softball team to MLB.

Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

Fine. Just suspend ALL of the players guilty of multiple helmet-to-helmet infractions (Ray Lewis) rather than one stupid enough to criticize the commissioner (Harrison).

Ray Lewis has had a few, but he's still not anywhere near a head hunter. I'd suspend Ward for his helmet to helmet hits "good blocking skills" before Lewis. Any defender can get a fine per year on accident without the head hunter label. I'd use Merriweather as the counterpart to Harrison's rep. The hit on McCoy was as bad as Merri's last year (and earlier this year iirc). Lewis has good form, Harrison hunts for heads. Huge difference. And before you cry bias, I hate the Ravens too.

 

[treat88]

heres a hint: nfl players arent perfectly rational entities. esp "in the heat of battle."

Without helmets they may surprise you with their clarity of thought re:using their head as a spear into another guys head.

HIThe accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

You seem to want to frame this argument as those who want to see players protected vs those who want to see players injured, when that is not the root of the discussion at all.The question is, if all helmet to helmet contact should be illegal, why not simply write an unambiguous rule? Why does the league go through the machinations of defenseless vs non-defenseless? Why do they try to delineate the use of the helmet in butting, ramming, and spearing vs. routine tackling situations?At this point in time, again rightly or wrongly, it absolutely makes a difference as to whether a player is deemed a ballcarrier or defenseless.

Because the game DOES happen quickly...some ambiguity is necessary or the game would suffer. Some "judgement" is required on the part of the officials.Look...there've been times when the flag has been thrown and I felt like the defender did no wrong. Some of the flags QB's in the pocket draw are just plain ridiculous. The NFL is horribly inconsistant and Goodell is screwing the whole thing up. I agree with that much. BUT...and this is a big BUT, H2H hits of the kind Harrison laid on McCoy are completely and 100% un-necessary. H2H hits that are clearly and easily avoidable deserve not just a flag, but a hefty fine and suspension (for repeat offenders). Harrison lined McCoy up, and PURPOSEFULLY TARGETTED his melon. Admitting he did so because "he's a runner..I'm allowed to" just shows what an idiot he really is...he really doesn't care if someone gets hurt or killed. It is his attitude, not Goodell's bad job implementing new safety rules, that will ruin the game in the end.

I agree that type of hit is usually unnecessary and avoidable.The question is, is it illegal if the player is deemed a runner? Not is it right or wrong, but is it legal?If the hit is legal and helps a team win games either by causing a turnover or removing a key player from the game, I can't fault the defender when it happens.Based on prior league explanation, current league explanation of this hit, precedent, and the rule book IMO if McCoy had been a runner it would have been considered legal.Intent is subjective, but to me intent is the key element in determining whether helmet to helmet contact should be legal.I wish the league would just put a rule in place that intentional helmet to helmet is illegal and remove the ambiguity.

 

[geoff8695]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I was raised on the same football you were GB, and guys like **** Butkus used to absolutely destroy anything that got in their way. Sure it was entertaining, but back then we didn't fully understand the long term consequences for those on the receiving end of some of those collisions. Thankfully clotheslines/horse collars/and helmet to helmet are being legislated out of today's game to keep the game from becoming extinct.Human bodies/craniums/grey matter/nervous systems/spinal cords have certain limitations that can't be enhanced through nutrition and fitness. However, the ever increasing size/speed/power of today's players would absolutely maim or kill our warrior/heroes from the 70s if allowed to play each other under the same rules...So it's fine and dandy to remember the past fondly, but you're not going to have such fond memories if/when a modern day headhunter ends up literally 'killing' another man Roman gladiator style, just to convince you they are true 'warriors' like your childhood heroes.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I was raised on the same football you were GB, and guys like **** Butkus used to absolutely destroy anything that got in their way. Sure it was entertaining, but back then we didn't fully understand the long term consequences for those on the receiving end of some of those collisions. Thankfully clotheslines/horse collars/and helmet to helmet are being legislated out of today's game to keep the game from becoming extinct.Human bodies/craniums/grey matter/nervous systems/spinal cords have certain limitations that can't be enhanced through nutrition and fitness. However, the ever increasing size/speed/power of today's players would absolutely maim or kill our warrior/heroes from the 70s if allowed to play each other under the same rules...So it's fine and dandy to remember the past fondly, but you're not going to have such fond memories if/when a modern day headhunter ends up literally 'killing' another man Roman gladiator style, just to convince you they are true 'warriors' like your childhood heroes.

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

 

[The Great Snook]

Not only would I suspend him, I would extend it to the playoffs.

 

[treat88]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?

Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?

Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

 

[faulkfan]

The fact of the matter is, that helmet to helmet contact is not a penalty, intentional or unintentional, if the player being hit is considered a ballcarrier...

You need to do a better job of fact checking GB... While helmet to helmet contact in ALL situations IS NOT automatically an illegal hit, the FACT OF THE MATTER is that any time a defender is considered to be:

" using any part of a players 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 is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protect those players who are in virtually defenseless postures."

Just because a player is not considered to be in a defenseless posture is not a free license to initiate a 'helmet to helmet' or 'helmet to any other body part' collision. And if it is deemed to be excessively violent and/or unnecessary, then it too will be considered a violation of NFL rules, even against a ballcarrier...

Many laws you may question, just in California. Are these enforcable, or just "still there?" Does anybody really care?

This is perhaps one of the most misguided and feeble attempts at logic I have ever read, but I'll bite. I am guessing that people would care about the law if the animals mating within 1500 feet of a tavern were causing concussions or had the potential to leave people paralyzed.

 

[Ghost Rider]

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

Honestly, you sound like someone who would ask why the scantily-clothed woman who got raped dressed the way she did. In other words, just because you leave yourself exposed (in this case, McCoy), doesn't give anyone the right to take advantage of you by cheap-shotting you.

 

[geoff8695]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I was raised on the same football you were GB, and guys like **** Butkus used to absolutely destroy anything that got in their way. Sure it was entertaining, but back then we didn't fully understand the long term consequences for those on the receiving end of some of those collisions. Thankfully clotheslines/horse collars/and helmet to helmet are being legislated out of today's game to keep the game from becoming extinct.Human bodies/craniums/grey matter/nervous systems/spinal cords have certain limitations that can't be enhanced through nutrition and fitness. However, the ever increasing size/speed/power of today's players would absolutely maim or kill our warrior/heroes from the 70s if allowed to play each other under the same rules...

So it's fine and dandy to remember the past fondly, but you're not going to have such fond memories if/when a modern day headhunter ends up literally 'killing' another man Roman gladiator style, just to convince you they are true 'warriors' like your childhood heroes.

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

Well I'ld guess that the quarterback, who just completed a pass to keep the chains moving in a tight game against a bitter divisional rival, and who is granted special protection by the current NFL rules, which define him as being in a "defenseless posture" that precludes headhunters from getting away with lining up kill shots against his melon, probably didn't concern himself with 'protecting himself' at all; and instead was trying his hardest to lead his team to a late 4th quarter go-ahead TD that could possibly win the game. So what's your theory... Big-Steel-Thrill?

 

[faulkfan]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I think you accurately present one side of the argument.EDIT: And I agree that in that situation Harrison should light up McCoy and make him think about it the next time he decides to scramble. I disagree that he should drop his head and use his helmet to try and knock McCoy out. Harrison could have delivered a viscous, yet clearly legal hit to McCoy.

Suh has already been fined a couple times for this.

Good point. I do agree that League needs to be more consistent with it's fines and that that gap of misunderstanding has slowed the players acceptance of the direction the League is attempting to take.

Hell, this is flag worthy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv1f37dVNZ8&feature=player_embedded what a wonderful play by London.

Colt McCoy is not Tom Brady. They called 4 personal foul penalties on Washington during warmups because the linemen were giving him dirty looks. Brady is a p***y and even the refs know it. The NFL has been tweaking and making up new rules for him since his first season as a starter, perhaps he isn't someone we should use as an example for what a personal foul looks like.Your point, however, is valid. If London committed a personal foul then Harrison committed a crime because his was more vicious and included leading with the crown of his helmet and going for the head. McCoy didn't duck so the hit was intended to make contact on his face. Dirty play and if it happened to your QB you would be on this board asking for fines and suspensions just like the folks who don't bleed black and gold on this board are right now.

 

[TheFootballJesus]

Plain and simple, Harrison's done this enough times to know better. His record's pretty clear by now, he goes headhunting, makes hits with the intent of causing injury, and has no regrets. Fines haven't worked, it makes sense to suspend him.

 

[CalBear]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

If the guy isn't holding the ball, it's not a legal hit, no matter what position he's playing.If the guy is holding the ball, it probably won't get called if it's an RB but might get called if it's a QB.

 

[TheFootballJesus]

Colt McCoy is not Tom Brady. They called 4 personal foul penalties on Washington during warmups because the linemen were giving him dirty looks. Brady is a p***y and even the refs know it. The NFL has been tweaking and making up new rules for him since his first season as a starter, perhaps he isn't someone we should use as an example for what a personal foul looks like.

There were bad calls on both sides in the game...andre carter got called for roughing the passer after being pushed into Grossman's legs and Wilfork got called for unnecessary roughness for lying down on roy helu. This isn't a protect Tom Brady issue, it's a protect all offensive players issue.

 

[faulkfan]

Colt McCoy is not Tom Brady. They called 4 personal foul penalties on Washington during warmups because the linemen were giving him dirty looks. Brady is a p***y and even the refs know it. The NFL has been tweaking and making up new rules for him since his first season as a starter, perhaps he isn't someone we should use as an example for what a personal foul looks like.

There were bad calls on both sides in the game...andre carter got called for roughing the passer after being pushed into Grossman's legs and Wilfork got called for unnecessary roughness for lying down on roy helu. This isn't a protect Tom Brady issue, it's a protect all offensive players issue.

Brady isn't considered an offensive player in the NFL, he is considered a God. Different rules apply to him, but you are correct that this is not the direction of this discussion.

 

[treat88]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

If the guy isn't holding the ball, it's not a legal hit, no matter what position he's playing.If the guy is holding the ball, it probably won't get called if it's an RB but might get called if it's a QB.

Is it your opinion then that is a legal hit against a runner, assuming they are still in possession of the ball?

 

[CalBear]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

If the guy isn't holding the ball, it's not a legal hit, no matter what position he's playing.If the guy is holding the ball, it probably won't get called if it's an RB but might get called if it's a QB.

Is it your opinion then that is a legal hit against a runner, assuming they are still in possession of the ball?

I'm not an expert on the NFL rulebook, but I would be surprised to see that flagged against a runner in possession of the ball if it's not a QB. I think the rule should be the same for RBs and QBs but the practice is different.

 

[treat88]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

If the guy isn't holding the ball, it's not a legal hit, no matter what position he's playing.If the guy is holding the ball, it probably won't get called if it's an RB but might get called if it's a QB.

Is it your opinion then that is a legal hit against a runner, assuming they are still in possession of the ball?

I'm not an expert on the NFL rulebook, but I would be surprised to see that flagged against a runner in possession of the ball if it's not a QB. I think the rule should be the same for RBs and QBs but the practice is different.

Fair answer. Thanks.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

Honestly, you sound like someone who would ask why the scantily-clothed woman who got raped dressed the way she did. In other words, just because you leave yourself exposed (in this case, McCoy), doesn't give anyone the right to take advantage of you by cheap-shotting you.

Except in this case... the NFL DIRECTOR has stated its legal to rape the woman.i.e. its LEGAL to have helmet-to-helmet hits on a RUNNER, because he has the option to protect himself.Thus my question. (and the fallacy of your analogy).

 

[BigSteelThrill]

That was my favorite play of the game! McCoy should have known better after getting pummeled by Harrison last year as well. He would have been better off rolling up in a fetal position than throwing that half-hearted, sissy pass. He got what he deserved. We won't see him taking off with the ball tucked away any time soon!

I want an angry James Harrison on my team. I want him hitting the field each week with bad intentions in his mind. I want him hurting the players on the other team. This gives the Steelers a better chance to win. I was weaned on the likes of Greene, Lambert, Holmes, White, Shell and Blount. These were warriors who went out, did battle with the other team and did their best to beat the spirit out of the opponent. THIS is the football I want to see. I am not alone in this but each year my kind lose more ground to Roger Greed-hole and his puppets.

I do not think he should be fined or suspended. I think he will get both of them though.

And he will be an animal on fire when he returns!

I was raised on the same football you were GB, and guys like **** Butkus used to absolutely destroy anything that got in their way. Sure it was entertaining, but back then we didn't fully understand the long term consequences for those on the receiving end of some of those collisions. Thankfully clotheslines/horse collars/and helmet to helmet are being legislated out of today's game to keep the game from becoming extinct.Human bodies/craniums/grey matter/nervous systems/spinal cords have certain limitations that can't be enhanced through nutrition and fitness. However, the ever increasing size/speed/power of today's players would absolutely maim or kill our warrior/heroes from the 70s if allowed to play each other under the same rules...

So it's fine and dandy to remember the past fondly, but you're not going to have such fond memories if/when a modern day headhunter ends up literally 'killing' another man Roman gladiator style, just to convince you they are true 'warriors' like your childhood heroes.

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

Well I'ld guess that the quarterback, who just completed a pass to keep the chains moving in a tight game against a bitter divisional rival, and who is granted special protection by the current NFL rules, which define him as being in a "defenseless posture" that precludes headhunters from getting away with lining up kill shots against his melon, probably didn't concern himself with 'protecting himself' at all; and instead was trying his hardest to lead his team to a late 4th quarter go-ahead TD that could possibly win the game. So what's your theory... Big-Steel-Thrill?

I agree. Both McCoy (who has a chance to protect himself, as explained by the nfl) and Harrison (who has a chance to protect McCoy) are playing football and sacrificing themselves (injury-penalty) to try and win a game.

Game on!

 

[geoff8695]

Except in this case... the NFL DIRECTOR has stated its legal to rape the woman.

i.e. its LEGAL to have helmet-to-helmet hits on a RUNNER, because he has the option to protect himself.

Thus my question. (and the fallacy of your analogy).

Dude, You couldn't be more wrong....I've only posted the NFL's official position on this matter in here about three or four times, as well as a link to the rules clarification that every NFL player receives at the beginning of the year (complete with illustrations for those who can't read...).

There is no free license to strike a RB or ballcarrier's head. It's a judgment call on the part of the NFL and the officials calling the game. ANY contact to the face/neck/helmet that is judged to be "excessively violent or unnecessary" IS ILLEGAL. PERIOD.

Furthermore, if the player is in a "defenseless posture", then there isn't even any judgment to be made. It is absolutely forbidden and ALWAYS ILLEGAL. PERIOD.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Ray Anderson, NFL executive vice president of football operations

We caught up with Anderson in a telephone interview as the week wound down.



Q: Why wasn't the James Harrison hit on Josh Cribbs considered an illegal hit?

A: Because he was a runner. He was not defenseless under our rules. So he had a chance on his own to protect himself. So he wasn't under the category of defenseless player per the rules. Exposed? Yeah, but he was a runner. Runners aren't protected from helmet to helmet hits under the current rules.

This was the exact explanation given to Harrison previously.Further more, from your own link...

Perhaps this link will help Steelers fans come to grips with the fact that the NFL rules still protect a player who runs before throwing the football from blows to the head.

League's Official Player Safety Rules

The following information regarding player safety is included in the 2010 League Policies for Players manual, which is distributed to all players and coaches at the start of training camp.

It includes detailed information on illegal hits, including diagrams. We hope this information is helpful in understanding the NFL's player safety-related rules. There has been no change in rules since the start of the season, only an increase in the level of discipline for violations of existing rules.

There is even a picture about two thirds of the way down the page, so that illiterate NFL players, and their fans can SEE what an illegal hit to the QBs head looks like (no joke).

From your link, down at the bottom:4. Protection While Out of Pocket. 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 and the provision regarding low hits, but he remains covered by all other special protections afforded to a passer in the pocket. If a passer outside the pocket stops behind the line and clearly establishes a passing posture, he is covered by all of the special protections.

By that definition, yes he's guilty and I already agreed that he will be fined. That will only last until Cam Newton lights up a safety trying to take him on just a foot behind the line of scrimmage. Defenders cannot be hamstrung like that if the QB has turned into a runner, and Colt certainly looked like he was running until Harrison was already launching himself (LEGAL if done vs a runner capable of protecting himself).

The bolded is what people are trying to argue. I have no doubt that Harrison was trying to throw a haymaker hit. He had a legal (and yes, to all the tools claiming that helmet to helmet is never legal, look it up or, if you're too lazy to do that just open the dozen links provided in this thread stating that helmet to helmet hits only protect defensless players ie passing QBs only until they pass the LOS, recievers that have not completed a catch and had an opportunity to protect themselves, players fielding a punt and kickers) chance - or so it appeared .4 seconds before Colt passed the ball, to light him up.

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.

And the penalty was NOT for spearing or using the helmet as a weapon. It was simply for helmet-to-helmet contact.

 

[CalBear]

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.

Uh, you know one of the things that might go a ways towards establishing yourself as a passer is, you know, throwing a pass.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

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.

But it doesn't include his storied past. Which is going to be held against Harrison, regardless of the above posts. I just wanted to keep the above info clear.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

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.

Uh, you know one of the things that might go a ways towards establishing yourself as a passer is, you know, throwing a pass.

Not really, it means he threw a pass, not that he had re-established himself as a passer on the field.Just as you could establish yourself as a passer - and never throw the ball, and never intend to throw the ball (reverse/draw).

As I stated before... your defensive player can tackle a QB for a loss, and if he tucks the ball away and starts to run (establishing himself as a runner) and you WONT get a sack. Why? Because he is no longer an established passer on the field.

And the official even states "CLEARLY", which is obviously not the case with McCoy.

 

[CalBear]

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.

Uh, you know one of the things that might go a ways towards establishing yourself as a passer is, you know, throwing a pass.

Not really, it means he threw a pass, not that he had re-established himself as a passer on the field.Just as you could establish yourself as a passer - and never throw the ball, and never intend to throw the ball (reverse/draw).

I believe it is possible to establish yourself as a passer without throwing a pass. I don't believe it is possible to throw a pass without establishing yourself as a passer.

As I stated before... your defensive player can tackle a QB for a loss, and if he tucks the ball away and starts to run (establishing hismelf as a runner) and you WONT get a sack. Why? Because he is not longer an established passer on the field.

Yes, and that's completely irrelevant to the hit on McCoy, who threw a pass right over Harrison's head in Harrison's full view.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't believe it is possible to throw a pass without establishing yourself as a passer.

Have you seen the Tebow collegiate option?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Yes, and that's completely irrelevant to the hit on McCoy, who threw a pass right over Harrison's head in Harrison's full view.

No its not, at :11 he is in full established RUNNER mode... at :12 the ball is out of his hands.He is never CLEARLY established as a passer again. (as per the rule explanation) Just because Randy Moss or Barry Sanders flicks the ball away doesn't make him/them a passer with all those protections. They are explicit about it.

 

[geoff8695]

Ray Anderson, NFL executive vice president of football operations

We caught up with Anderson in a telephone interview as the week wound down.



Q: Why wasn't the James Harrison hit on Josh Cribbs considered an illegal hit?

A: Because he was a runner. He was not defenseless under our rules. So he had a chance on his own to protect himself. So he wasn't under the category of defenseless player per the rules. Exposed? Yeah, but he was a runner. Runners aren't protected from helmet to helmet hits under the current rules.

This was the exact explanation given to Harrison previously.

Alright I guess I can see why you're consistently getting this wrong. You are relying entirely on an old interview that took place in or prior to October of 2010, regarding one particular circumstance and Josh Cribbs. However, since that time the NFL has ratcheted up its rules and its penalties concerning hits to the neck/face/head, and has increased the focus and the penalties for these types of hits...

 

[geoff8695]

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...Around this time last season the NFL decided to up the ante regarding protecting its players when it comes to head trauma including helmet to helmet hits. This quote is not in keeping with the NFL's current rules and interpretations and its OFFICIAL SAFETY RULES handed out to teams during training camp.

 

[geoff8695]

Here are the latest NFL rules:

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8, Paragraph F

"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, including but not limited to:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head, neck, or face with the helmet or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or

(2) Lowering the head and violently or unnecessarily making forcible contact with the “hairline” or forehead part of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body; or

(3) “Launching” (springing forward and upward) into a defenseless player, or otherwise striking him in a way that causes the defensive player’s helmet or facemask to forcibly strike the defenseless player’s head, neck, or face—even if the initial contact of the defender’s helmet or facemask is lower than the defenseless player’s neck. (Examples: a defender buries his facemask into a defenseless player’s high chest area, but the defender’s trajectory as he leaps into the defenseless player causes the defender’s helmet to strike the defenseless player violently in the head or face; or a defender, using a face-on posture or with his head slightly lowered, hits a defenseless player in an area below the defenseless player’s neck, then the defender’s head moves upward, resulting in strong contact by the defender’s mask or helmet with the defenseless player’s head, neck, or face [an example is the so-called “dip and rip” technique]).

Note: The provisions of section (f) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or noncrown parts of the helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on an opponent."

It defines defenseless players as, "(i) a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass; (ii) a receiver catching or attempting to catch a pass; (iii) a runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped; (iv) a kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air; and (v) a player on the ground at the end of a play."

Additionally, the NFL hands out its own "Official Player Safety Rules" to every player and every coach complete with diagrams, during training camp to help get players familiar with the current state of the rules and how the NFL will enforce them, as opposed to however it may have been called in the past.

 

[Dizzy]

I thought it was a great hit.

While I admire McCoy's guts for keeping the play alive and looking for a target... he really set himself up for a monster hit. And he got it.

After the Brady penalty yesterday I'm convinced that fouls/fines will come every time a QB is tackled, so you may as well get your money's worth.

 

[CalBear]

Yes, and that's completely irrelevant to the hit on McCoy, who threw a pass right over Harrison's head in Harrison's full view.

No its not, at :11 he is in full established RUNNER mode... at :12 the ball is out of his hands.

At which point he is no longer a runner.Also, at which point James Harrison is still two yards away from him, looking straight at him. There's no way Harrison could not have known the ball was gone. He went head hunting and now he's going to pay for it.

 

[Godsbrother]

The accidental head to head in the speed of the game argument just does not work for me. I played rugby for many years and the speed of play is plenty fast and there are just as many tackles. And head to head contact is not an issue because when you tackle you make sure you don't knock yourself out.

Comparing your experience in a recreation rugby league to the NFL is like comparing my beer league softball team to MLB.

Clearly some players in the NFL look for the helmet to helmet hits. Clearly the NFL wants these hits out of the game. Clearly regardless of any perceived gray area the hit Harrison put on McCoy is exactly the type of hit the NFL wants to go away. The NFL does not want the helmet to be a weapon and will continue to flag, fine and eventually suspend players until they figure it out. So keep arguing runner or not runner blah, blah, blah if you want. But the League has made it plain that they are committed to stopping the head hunting and any player that continues to try and crack coconuts with his helmet is going to suffer. And I will have no sympathy for the players that simply refuse to see the writing on the wall.

Fine. Just suspend ALL of the players guilty of multiple helmet-to-helmet infractions (Ray Lewis) rather than one stupid enough to criticize the commissioner (Harrison).

Ray Lewis has had a few, but he's still not anywhere near a head hunter. I'd suspend Ward for his helmet to helmet hits "good blocking skills" before Lewis. Any defender can get a fine per year on accident without the head hunter label. I'd use Merriweather as the counterpart to Harrison's rep. The hit on McCoy was as bad as Merri's last year (and earlier this year iirc). Lewis has good form, Harrison hunts for heads. Huge difference. And before you cry bias, I hate the Ravens too.

Ray Lewis was fined for helmet-to-helmets hits in each of the past three seasons, how is this good form? You are making no sense. If the league is going to suspend multiple offenders then shouldnt it apply to everyone?

 

[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?

 

[renesauz]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

No...it isn't. Intentionally leading with the helmet toward another players helmet is illegal.

 

[treat88]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

No...it isn't. Intentionally leading with the helmet toward another players helmet is illegal.

Not arguing but, based on what?

 

[renesauz]

So why didn't the runner protect himself? He certainly could have.

BS....more offensive players take big hits to the cranium when they "protect themself" than when they don't. You can curl up and protect a rib, or leave your feet slightly to protect a knee...you can't protect your cranium any better than to have you head up more than 5+ feet off the ground.

 

[renesauz]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

No...it isn't. Intentionally leading with the helmet toward another players helmet is illegal.

Not arguing but, based on what?

the rules quoted multiple times above. Look...they don't call it when it's a RB who puts his own head down and runs head first through a pile...nor should they. BUt a QB who's standing UPRIGHT? I don't give a flip if he has the ball or not, is a runner or passer. NOBODY who is UPRIGHT with his head that high off the ground should be speared in the noggin.It's a cheap dirty play, it's against the rules. Harrison's further comments today tell me he should be suspended at LEAST 2 games....he still doesn't get it...and apparently many fans don't either.

 

[treat88]

The question still stands...under the current rules, if the league had deemed McCoy a runner is that a legal hit?Also, if that was not a QB with the ball is that a legal hit?Not asking for opinions about right and wrong but rather legal or illegal.

No...it isn't. Intentionally leading with the helmet toward another players helmet is illegal.

Not arguing but, based on what?

the rules quoted multiple times above. Look...they don't call it when it's a RB who puts his own head down and runs head first through a pile...nor should they. BUt a QB who's standing UPRIGHT? I don't give a flip if he has the ball or not, is a runner or passer. NOBODY who is UPRIGHT with his head that high off the ground should be speared in the noggin.It's a cheap dirty play, it's against the rules. Harrison's further comments today tell me he should be suspended at LEAST 2 games....he still doesn't get it...and apparently many fans don't either.

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.

 

[renesauz]

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.

 

[geoff8695]

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?

It's not just purely a change in rules, but also an evolution and change in interpretation that became a focus in 2010 and has continued down to today and will continue going forward.I believe the rules were changed in 2010, and the Official Safety Rules came out around this time last year iirc. Either way, it's an ongoing process, and a response to growing scientific studies regarding professional football and injuries (especially concussions and brain damage).

 

[ookook]

It was unnecessary and violent. It is a penalty to lead with your helmets that way against anyone with the posture McCoy had with his head at that level in that position.

A RB with head down is one thing, the head up high is another.

So it is not a legal hit whether he is inside the pocket, outside the pocket, defenseless, or in front of the line of scrimmage. It is not a legal hit if he were a RB, Kicker, or WR.

I hope Harrison likes green eggs and ham, because I say 2 games.

 

[ookook]

That was sort of the point...