NFL says hit on Foles after the pick was legal

How can you argue it wasn't legal?

It's not like he clipped him, it was square in the chest. Not his fault Foles had his head turned the wrong way.

because more often than not if there is a tackle made it is by the QB. However, that was a cheap shot and there is no defending that. The NFL is so inconsistent with their rules it is ridiculous.

was clearly down imo.

The timing, a bit late. Could go either way.

Vs the Eagles, for a moment I thought he might have been killed.

Tough fucker, our quarterback.

and before anyone suggests, not because it was Foles getting blasted, but because he was trying to make a tackle on the play.

Had he been jogging somewhere on the other side of the field, I could see the argument being made for protecting the QB from blindside hits.

In comment 11879992 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

because more often than not if there is a tackle made it is by the QB. However, that was a cheap shot and there is no defending that. The NFL is so inconsistent with their rules it is ridiculous.

How is it cheap? You're taught from pee wee football to play until the whistle and keep your head on a swivel.

If you're arguing the hit itself, that's not even close to being illegal.

legit hit - vicious and like Vincent says you can debate if its unsportsmanlike conduct - but I thought it was legal.

People on here (and Aikman) confused the new defenseless QB rule.

they thought it was a QB was defenseless and could not be hit after a pick as long as he wasn't in the play and attempting to tackle the defender or something like that.

In reality, as long as its not head or neck - like this wasn't - it's a legal hit.

There was a lot of discussion about it - only reason I made this thread, thought it may interest people.

headed towards him. He was most certainly in the play.

In comment 11879993 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

was clearly down imo.

Baker doesn't have the benefit of a slowmotion replay. The block and the knee going down are within a fraction of a second of each other and before the whistle. The whistle has to be the marker for the end of a play because what if Baker has his back turned to the ball carrier when he makes his block?

QB better be aware of who is near him if he is going to be running towards the action in that situation. What did they used to say, he needs to have his head on a swivel?

.

I could see penalizing him (didn't agree, but it was at least close enough to merit debate), but ejection?

Foles is heading toward the ball carrier who is still moving forward when Baker committed to the block. He does not hit him in the head and he does not clip him.

Unless you cannot under any circumstances hit the QB that hit is not illegal. Gotta keep your head on a swivel Nickie.

He got chicken winged.

In comment 11880020 USAF NYG Fan said:

Quote:

58 hits Eli square in the back.

he took a much worse shot than that. The gif above my post isn't the one either. It was much worse.

was down by like 1/10th of a second before the hit, which basically means that it was during the play. Come on...

This was 100% a legal and fair hit. Not a cheap shot at all.

I think it was Trotter who laid Eli out his rookie year, right? I legitimately thought Eli died.

is hitting the ground, so not late either.

Nobody wants to see the QB get hurt but if he is going to follow the play after his own interception he is fair game.

Foles didn't learn this lesson last season b/c he only threw 2 picks. So I say welcome to the NFL pal...

Actually Trotter laid out Feagles I think. It was McDougle who almost killed Eli, IIRC.

it was a legal hit and I was getting killed on here. He blocks a player below the head, not leading with the head and it isn't a clip.

I believe he was ejected for fighting with Peters - which he really had no choice about once Peters went after him.

(for Foles and all involved from an ejection standpoint) is the ball wasn't picked. It hit the ground so it turned out it was just an incompletion.

and I haven't changed my mind. First of all, Foles is jogging toward the play, and thus has established himself as a potential tackler. Second, it was a clean his in terms of the defender getting his helmet in front of Foles and then hitting him square in the chest. Third, I don't think it was late at all. the runner is going down as the initial contact with Foles is made. No whistle blew, as the runner was not yet down. Any way you slice it, the hit was clean.

In comment 11880037 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

Actually Trotter laid out Feagles I think. It was McDougle who almost killed Eli, IIRC.

Yea, the McDougle hit. I also thought that was the end of Eli's career when I saw it.

In comment 11880047 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

(for Foles and all involved from an ejection standpoint) is the ball wasn't picked. It hit the ground so it turned out it was just an incompletion.

As a Giant fan, that's the best thing about it.

I changed my mind after initially thinking it was legal is Aikman on the broadcast said they made a new rule a couple years ago, that you couldn't hit a QB after a pick.

Aikman was wrong, FMiC and others were right. I believed Aikman, so I was wrong too and I have learned my lesson.

Are correct..

...he risks getting blocked or knocked out of the play. That being said, anyone who watches their QB get hit like that is going to look for a flag...or vengeance.

Any pass rusher is going to want to put his hands on the opposing QB, and while this wasn't an illegal play, it is bush league IMO.

.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv7DTI-kTzA - ( New Window )

however, with all the added protection given to the QBs these days, you could also make a case that the runner was already being tackled and the QB wasn't impacting the play.

But furthermore, it was a boom boom play.

So what do you want from me?

If the hit was considered to occur after the play was over, that would be an obvious foul. Let's assume that the whistle had not blown and we are dealing with a defenseless player (as the NFL says).

The rule book lists a number of instances where a player is considered defenseless. One of them (#7) is:

"A quarterback at any time after a change of possession (Also see Article 8(f) for additional restrictions against a quarterback after a change of possession)"

So Foles is a defenseless player.

The rule book makes the following general statement:

"It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture".

This would seem to give the referees wide latitude in considering something "unnecessary". But the rules go into more specifics about protections for defenseless players, which is what the league apparently looked at.

There are three protections for defenseless players:

"(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and 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 making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/hairline¡ parts of the helmet
against any part of the defenseless player's body; or
(3) Illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to
contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) 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."

This is followed by a the following notes:

"Note1: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.

Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes
illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."

Now it appears that (1) (2) and (3) didn't apply to the Foles hit. But note that the (#7) designation above also says to look at article 8(f). Going there we find the following. Whether it applies to Foles comes down to the words "distinctly defensive position". This article 8(f) stuff appears under the "Roughing the Passer" rules

"(f) A passer who is standing still or fading backward after the ball has left his hand is obviously out of the play and must not be unnecessarily contacted by an opponent through the end of the down or until the passer becomes a blocker, or a runner, or, in the event of a change of possession during the down, until he assumes a distinctly defensive position. However, at any time after the change of possession, it is a foul if (i) an opponent forcibly hits the quarterback's head or neck area with his helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, or (ii) 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 (ii) does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or the helmet in the course of a conventional block."

Wow...look at whet the refs are up against. Look at all those rules and exceptions.

the difference between that hit.......

and when a guy chasing a punt returner is tuned up with a vicious hit from an angle he can't see.

In a more gentle NFL, I think this is a penalty......

Where a blocker peels back and hits a guy who is not looking has become a penalty or even the defenseless WR penalties, but this is legal. I think all should be legal, but the way try call these things seems wildly inconsistent

Ballcarrier is clearly going down before Baker unloads on him.

let that be a lesson to Foles...throw a pick, go after the ball carrier, but with your head on a swivel!!!!

In comment 11880082 Bino5 said:

Quote:

Where a blocker peels back and hits a guy who is not looking has become a penalty or even the defenseless WR penalties, but this is legal. I think all should be legal, but the way try call these things seems wildly inconsistent

Beno - my exact point, right above your post!!!!

and on the way down. the ball carrier was on the way down, which is not a guarantee of being down.

being defenseless. Foles was clearly trying to secure a tackle on the return.

was from 2011 (Vince Young game at Met Life).

I don't remember a penalty either, nor do I remember anyone jumping in to brawl..just some pushing and shoving.

but because of the timing but you guys are probably right. This is the first time I have seen it and the slow motion skewed it for me. However, Foles appears to just be trotting and even though his knee is not down he is on his way down and it looks like most everybody else realizes the play is over. It may be considered legal but it is still a cheap shot. I'm a defensive guy and I always preach to my kids to get the QB on the interception. I just think the intentions of the one hitting Foles was to just hurt him and not to block him from making a play. I know. I know. You are taught at a young age to be aware of that and Foles should have. However, if that was Eli I am sure a lot of you guys would change your opinion of the hit.

Also, didn't Sapp get fined or suspended for something similar to that. I think if the QB or anybody not near the play gets hit like that they throw the flag. At least they used to.

but because of the timing but you guys are probably right. This is the first time I have seen it and the slow motion skewed it for me. However, Foles appears to just be trotting and even though his knee is not down he is on his way down and it looks like most everybody else realizes the play is over. It may be considered legal but it is still a cheap shot. I'm a defensive guy and I always preach to my kids to get the QB on the interception. I just think the intentions of the one hitting Foles was to just hurt him and not to block him from making a play. I know. I know. You are taught at a young age to be aware of that and Foles should have. However, if that was Eli I am sure a lot of you guys would change your opinion of the hit.

Also, didn't Sapp get fined or suspended for something similar to that. I think if the QB or anybody not near the play gets hit like that they throw the flag. At least they used to.

hit an OL and injured his ACL, right? Someone on GB?

Like Troy Vincent says in the link I think you can debate if it's unsportsmanlike conduct, that's ambiguous enough, but by letter of the rule, the hit in and of itself is legal.

is the way

In comment 11880116 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

hit an OL and injured his ACL, right? Someone on GB? Like Troy Vincent says in the link I think you can debate if it's unsportsmanlike conduct, that's ambiguous enough, but by letter of the rule, the hit in and of itself is legal.

Chad Clifton, IIRC. I thought it was a hip injury, though.

In comment 11880033 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

I think it was Trotter who laid Eli out his rookie year, right? I legitimately thought Eli died.

I think it was his first game and very first play.

was WELL away from where the ball was, and Sapp actually lauched himself somewhat instead of just going into the chest.............

But again, how do you judge how close the defender needs to be??