more details to follow, but on the surface, judgment calls like this one tend to be problematic.
Quote:
....The owners also approved a rule on automatic ejections for egregious hits to the head. This new rule comes a year after the league implemented an automatic ejection system for players who committed two personal fouls in the same game.
needs to be paramount and not just lip service, but two days ago Goodell was talking about speeding up the game.
If they have to do a lengthy review of every hit to the head to see if an ejection is warranted the games could all be extended well beyond eliminating a couple commercials.
Half the time now when the refs call a hit to the head on review it shows it's actually not or not a direct hit
but I'll wait to see the plans for how they plan to decide.
Let them play baseball if they dont want to get hit! How else do you stop a Odell Beckham type player if you cant hit him when its the only defense, pull up on a guy like that and he kills you all day.
if you have a subjective evaluation of the penalty? I guess it's more automatic if they call that penalty, but then refs will just be gunshy about making that call.
And we see it in the college game, is that the defensive player will often aim for the mid-section of the receiver to deliver a forceful, yet legal blow to hopefully dislodge the football but at least bring the receiver down immediately without forward progress.
The receiver, aware that a hit is coming, will often times "ball-up", bringing their head down to the oncoming defensive players strike zone, in essence, putting their own head in the path of the hit. There is no way for a defensive player to react to that to avoid the helmet-to-helmet in these situations. Oftentimes, even when the player is attempting to lead with the shoulder, the helmet-to-helmet contact is made, often forcibly, without intent, and the defensive player is the one who is always penalized.
We've seen how these judgement calls are adjudicated unevenly. Players don't want to hurt other players in the vast majority of cases. They know that egregiously violent hits on defenseless players are going to hit them in the wallet. This is a solution looking for a problem. I hate this, they are hurting the game. Refs cannot clearly define what an "egregious head shot" is consistently, and therein lies the problem, because this will negatively impact football games. Increase the fines, have a future suspension on the table, but an ejection in-game? It has failed in the college game and this will be worse.
Can't wait to see this called six different ways, in six different....
Let them play baseball if they dont want to get hit! How else do you stop a Odell Beckham type player if you cant hit him when its the only defense, pull up on a guy like that and he kills you all day.
Nobody's saying don't hit him - they're trying to rule out the over the top blatant head shots to defenseless receivers.
I'm all for preserving the physicality of the game, but I can understand the concept here. Also agree it's putting a heavy burden on refs to rule correctly on plays that happen in the blink of an eye
Now We'll All Look For What They Mean By Egregious
Egregious: conspicuous; especially : conspicuously bad : flagrant egregious errors
So if a receiver takes an "egregious hit" because the receiver moved his head after the defender started the "tackling process", it might be egregious, but doesn't it also have to be intentional?
Not in terms of playing a man short, but in terms of guys having to sit for a specified period of time.
For example: On helmet-to-helmet hits, keep the 15 yard penalty, automatic first down, but add a 5-minute penalty on the defender who initiated contact. Defender sits for 5 minutes on the game clock. Intentional or not, doesn't matter.
On the other hand, helmet-to-helmet hits are just a small part of what's damaging players' brains. The body of research is growing and it's pointing toward the flexing of the brain within the skull as a key source of long-term deterioration. That comes from impacts to the head that are common in normal football action -- a player's head hitting the ground, for example. There may be no way to prevent that, regardless of how many penalties get heaped on in the name of player safety.
The term Egregious is something a lawyer would use
The NFL should have used plainer language. They are really talking about flagrant hits to the head. You could probably call this the "Cam Newton" rule...
I would hope that this is not a rule used for contact on "bang-bang" plays (such as an offensive player lowering his head to deflect a defensive player's legal hit), but more tuned to players who use shots to the head when the other player is in a defenseless mode, or who hit the head one step after the play is over, like pass rushers who get one step.
This is probably leading to "rugby" style tackling, which is more of a wrap up and not a collision hit. I think the SeaHawks DB's were do a lot of that this year; it actually might be good for both sides, as DB's take a lot of punishment trying to knock out players.
Here's the link to an ESPN article about the SeaHawks
Rodney Harrison and Brandon Meriweather approve of this message.
This isn't soccer, which is a relatively simple game with few rules. NFL refs are already overtaxed.
I agree, this should be reviewed before ejecting.
Dawkins would have had a much shorter NFL career.
If they have to do a lengthy review of every hit to the head to see if an ejection is warranted the games could all be extended well beyond eliminating a couple commercials.
Half the time now when the refs call a hit to the head on review it shows it's actually not or not a direct hit
but I'll wait to see the plans for how they plan to decide.
The receiver, aware that a hit is coming, will often times "ball-up", bringing their head down to the oncoming defensive players strike zone, in essence, putting their own head in the path of the hit. There is no way for a defensive player to react to that to avoid the helmet-to-helmet in these situations. Oftentimes, even when the player is attempting to lead with the shoulder, the helmet-to-helmet contact is made, often forcibly, without intent, and the defensive player is the one who is always penalized.
We've seen how these judgement calls are adjudicated unevenly. Players don't want to hurt other players in the vast majority of cases. They know that egregiously violent hits on defenseless players are going to hit them in the wallet. This is a solution looking for a problem. I hate this, they are hurting the game. Refs cannot clearly define what an "egregious head shot" is consistently, and therein lies the problem, because this will negatively impact football games. Increase the fines, have a future suspension on the table, but an ejection in-game? It has failed in the college game and this will be worse.
Nobody's saying don't hit him - they're trying to rule out the over the top blatant head shots to defenseless receivers.
I'm all for preserving the physicality of the game, but I can understand the concept here. Also agree it's putting a heavy burden on refs to rule correctly on plays that happen in the blink of an eye
So if a receiver takes an "egregious hit" because the receiver moved his head after the defender started the "tackling process", it might be egregious, but doesn't it also have to be intentional?
Merriam-Webster: Egregious - ( New Window )
Back to basics ....
You know...that's a really good question.
Let me ask Jerry.
But it DOES give homegirl ref another chance to throw her flag into the stands. So that's a plus.
For example: On helmet-to-helmet hits, keep the 15 yard penalty, automatic first down, but add a 5-minute penalty on the defender who initiated contact. Defender sits for 5 minutes on the game clock. Intentional or not, doesn't matter.
On the other hand, helmet-to-helmet hits are just a small part of what's damaging players' brains. The body of research is growing and it's pointing toward the flexing of the brain within the skull as a key source of long-term deterioration. That comes from impacts to the head that are common in normal football action -- a player's head hitting the ground, for example. There may be no way to prevent that, regardless of how many penalties get heaped on in the name of player safety.
I would hope that this is not a rule used for contact on "bang-bang" plays (such as an offensive player lowering his head to deflect a defensive player's legal hit), but more tuned to players who use shots to the head when the other player is in a defenseless mode, or who hit the head one step after the play is over, like pass rushers who get one step.
This is probably leading to "rugby" style tackling, which is more of a wrap up and not a collision hit. I think the SeaHawks DB's were do a lot of that this year; it actually might be good for both sides, as DB's take a lot of punishment trying to knock out players.
Rugby-style tackling continues to work for Seahawks' defense
Here's one from Business Insider, with a very interesting graph on Concussions:
The Seahawks' dominating defense uses a safer rugby style of tackling, and it could change the NFL
And a very good in-depth article from The Guardian (England), which talks about it from the Rugby point of view, and how Pete Carroll got involved:
Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll uses rugby to tackle safety concerns.
Egregious leg/knee shots? Fine. But I don't believe even the most hit-happy players are intentionally going after heads.
Send your resume to the competition committee.