The "Blow To The Head" Rule

#1
orange+white=heaven

orange+white=heaven

VN GURU
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
30,513
Likes
3
#1
Who was it on our team got called on this against Leak last year?

This rule really needs to be amended to allow for different penalty yards for degree of infraction.

I think the NFL did as much this offseason.
 
#4
#4
orange+white=heaven said:
Who was it on our team got called on this against Leak last year?

This rule really needs to be amended to allow for different penalty yards for degree of infraction.

I think the NFL did as much this offseason.
Click to expand...


I agree. Penalties should range from:

1) Warning for truly unintentional and insignificant glancing contact, with second warning resulting in a 15 yarder unsportsmanlike against the team, as opposed to the player.

2) 10 yards for player who intentionally hits QB above the shoulder during routine tackling play.

3) 15 yards and ejected for inentionally hitting unprotected QB above the shoulders and intent appears to be to cause injury.
 
#5
#5
It's the pass interference rule that needs to be revised. I'd say half of PI calls never should have happened.
 
#6
#6
lawgator1 said:
I agree. Penalties should range from:

1) Warning for truly unintentional and insignificant glancing contact, with second warning resulting in a 15 yarder unsportsmanlike against the team, as opposed to the player....
Click to expand...

I like the idea of a warning being available to the official. Also like letting the official have the freedom to gauge intent. In this instance, I think intent is a pretty easy thing to judge..

LG, good to see you take this side on this. Without that penalty last year, you might not be gloating about a national title...
 
#7
#7
lawgator1 said:
I agree. Penalties should range from:

1) Warning for truly unintentional and insignificant glancing contact, with second warning resulting in a 15 yarder unsportsmanlike against the team, as opposed to the player.

2) 10 yards for player who intentionally hits QB above the shoulder during routine tackling play.

3) 15 yards and ejected for inentionally hitting unprotected QB above the shoulders and intent appears to be to cause injury.
Click to expand...

additonally:

4) any team hitting Chris Leak in the head is awarded 6 points.
 
#8
#8
orange+white=heaven said:
I like the idea of a warning being available to the official. Also like letting the official have the freedom to gauge intent. In this instance, I think intent is a pretty easy thing to judge..

LG, good to see you take this side on this. Without that penalty last year, you might not be gloating about a national title...
Click to expand...


Florida got plenty of close and even questionable calls last year, no doubt about it. We got victimized once or twice by them, too. But overall I'd be a liar if I didn't say that Florida benefited from a bunch of close ones.
 
#9
#9
Yellow card....oh my bad....just confused watching all this Becks stuff on the news...
 
#15
#15
That VERY questionable call against Mapu continued a decisive drive if memory served me correct. I had flashbacks of "the catch" for a TD. I guess UF fans could question the unsportsmanlike conduct call...but I like to complain when it could benefit "us". :whistling:
 
#16
#16
It should be revised. It's kind of ridiculous when a DL tries to block a pass and his arm scrapes the side of the QB's helment and gets penalized for it. When it was basically a hustle play
 
#18
#18
JJ_Hickman_07 said:
It should be revised. It's kind of ridiculous when a DL tries to block a pass and his arm scrapes the side of the QB's helment and gets penalized for it. When it was basically a hustle play
Click to expand...


Exactly. And that would be the warning variety.
 
#19
#19
I agree. That killed me. I also think that if we're going to have video review, they need to be able to override a ref's whistle if he has made the wrong call. (LSU fumble last year, for example) Refs can screw anything up, call the play dead, and it stands.
 
#23
#23
jwells said:
I agree. That killed me. I also think that if we're going to have video review, they need to be able to override a ref's whistle if he has made the wrong call. (LSU fumble last year, for example) Refs can screw anything up, call the play dead, and it stands.
Click to expand...


Sorry, can't agree with you on video review for a penalty call. That by definition is a judgment call. Having a staggered penalty for that particular offense of hitting the QB in the head makes sense to me because it gives them some lattitude to determine intent and likelihood of injury. But you can't have video review of a penalty.

P.S. Fumble isn't a penalty, anyway, and they can review that. If its a question of the whistle blowing, that's just life.
 
#25
#25
i have never understood why it is illegal to hit a QB high, but fine with everyone else
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top