bubba9497 Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 The fact is that it doesn't matter what people think about the rule, the rule is there. If a player goes up, as Carter did, and a defender hits him like Clark did, it's considered unnecessary roughness and hitting a defenseless player. It's part of the rules, it's not an issue up for debate at this point, and was the correct call. Also, the game is over, we won. Who cares? but Carter wasn't air bourne, 1 foot was on the ground, attempting to catch his own tipped ball. That's not defenseless. it wasn't the correct call. Should have been no call except inclomplete pass. and debting a play or call is fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkEd Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I saw his feet leave the ground, and the basically the rule says that the defender can't essentially lay the wood on a guy who lays out for a catch. If the player is stretching out like that, it becomes a play that a defender can't defend. Stupid rule. The fact is though, that it is also the type of call that is up to the officials to make a judgement call on. I'd like nothing more than to agree here, but the fact is that it was the correct call. The statement that the call hasn't been called much in the past is irrelevant. IMO it was a good call that went against us. It also was a good call on a stupid rule. I wish that the rule was taken out of the game, but it won't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinz_4_life Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 What kind of message board is it? board where u talk about stuff related to redskins, so if a mo fo wanna talk about a PF call on last weeks game he can do it, if some one dont have anything to say about the topic go to another thread. that simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 board where u talk about stuff related to redskins, so if a mo fo wanna talk about a PF call on last weeks game he can do it, if some one dont have anything to say about the topic go to another thread. that simple hey, i already contributed earlier in the thread. You don't have to get all hostile. :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinz_4_life Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 hey, i already contributed earlier in the thread. You don't have to get all hostile.:eaglesuck lol not getting hostile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 lol not getting hostile thing about these friggen message boards is you can never tell someone's tone. haha. youre the man. keep on posting :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 I saw his feet leave the ground, and the basically the rule says that the defender can't essentially lay the wood on a guy who lays out for a catch. If the player is stretching out like that, it becomes a play that a defender can't defend. Stupid rule. The fact is though, that it is also the type of call that is up to the officials to make a judgement call on. I'd like nothing more than to agree here, but the fact is that it was the correct call. The statement that the call hasn't been called much in the past is irrelevant. IMO it was a good call that went against us. It also was a good call on a stupid rule. I wish that the rule was taken out of the game, but it won't be. I looked up the rule, while it doesn't really define defenseless as anything other than a Receiver catching a ball.... it is specific about what part of the helmet or type of hit that is a penalty, and Clark didn't use the crown of his helmet, or face mask to ram, butt, or spear Carter, and he did not contact Carter's helmet the NFL Rule: "…using part of a player's helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/hairline parts) or face mask to butt, spear or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily; although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and face mask 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 (e.g., a receiver catching or attempting to catch a pass … )." per Mike Holgram of the rules committee "If he were to come in and just tackle him hard with his shoulder, not his head, no foul. Hit him as hard as you can hit him," Holmgren said. "So what happens is this thing about defenseless. The stuff you hear about defenseless -- did he catch the ball, he had the ball and it got knocked out -- you get lost in all that stuff."It's very clear as to what constitutes a foul." Helmet-to-helmet. Foul. Forearm or shoulder to the head. Foul. A hit anywhere with the crown of the helmet. Foul. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/football/93832_clare01.shtml Helmet-to-helmet is the most misunderstood rule in our book. Most people don’t understand it, including some of our coaches."The NFL penalizes defensive players who use the face mask, crown or any one of the four "hit points" on the helmet to strike a specific player under one of six "defenseless" conditions: a quarterback in the act of throwing; a wide receiver in the act of catching; a punt returner in the act of catching; a player who is down (spearing); a running back who is in the grasp of a defender and has lost his forward momentum or has stopped; and, new this season, a quarterback on change of possession (fumble/interception). http://www.ccchronicle.com/back/2002_fall/2002-12-09/sports4.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 i love the research bubba. i think you may have proved your point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooby Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I didn't even care about the penalty. I thought the hit was a great hit, the penalty might've been worthy, might've not. Either way the hit was worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DE SKINS FAN Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Were any highlights of the Giants game put up? I'm having trouble finding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 No, man...Originally Posted by What kind of message board is it? board where u talk about stuff related to redskins, so if a mo fo wanna talk about a PF call on last weeks game he can do it, if some one dont have anything to say about the topic go to another thread. that simple No, man ...It's a FIRGEN MESSAGE BOARD! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShredder Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I felt it in Florida! As a matter of fact, it lifted me up off my sofa! I will take the flag for the highlight of totally smashing a NY midget. I think it sends a wonderful message about the Redskins D. I wish it would have sent his helmet into the club level!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackdaddydean Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 first you cant put your shoulder in front of your head2nd, his head is turned, showing the side of the helmet hit the shoulder first then turned 3rd, he never touches Carter's head the penalty is "leading with the crown" into an exposed players "head", not under to the side :doh: bad call I'm not sure i understand, you seem to be refuting the argument made by the original poster but say it was a bad call. Sorry buddy, but as much as we all wish it wasnt a penalty, he lead with his helmet and a flag should have been thrown. Even if they called it wrong, it definately was leading with the helmet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aluadan Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Bubba, you are simply the biggest homer when it comes to ref's calls. If that play would have been exactly the same except the jersey's swapped, you would have clapped and said it was a good call. At some point you need to stop crying wolf, it's getting a bit old. As for the play, he lauchened himself at a reciever in which the TOP of his helmet hit the opposing players helmet in the ear hole. When I saw it during the game, I felt it was iffy but after watching it on Tivo a few times I have no problem with the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 The call was pure and utter BS. Close but BS nonetheless. This is football. I saw many supposedly "helmet to helmet" hits all weekend, many worse than clark's, and none were called as personal fouls. Yet again we get the shaft from the refs and I shouldn't need to tell a redskins fan about getting the shaft from the refs. from NFL Gamebook: 2-10-NYG 49 (:55) (No Huddle) 10-E.Manning pass incomplete to 84-T.Carter. PENALTY on WAS-27-W.Harris, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NYG 49. Unnecessary roughness? give me a break. How pathetic. They can't even get the player correct. Sad but true. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/gamebook/NFL_20051224_NYG@WAS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeNoRevs Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 A flag should of been thrown on that play. He is looking down. How can the top of his helmet not be touching the guy if he is loooking straight down at ground? I think even most Redskins fans agree that even though it was the wrong call, there should of been some kinda penalty. and about the toomer catch... The ball can touch the ground as long as he has CONTROL of the ball. Toomer clearly had control of that ball. We just got unlucky on that call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightForOldDC21 Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 that ball was tipped... clean hit... horrible call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeNoRevs Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 that ball was tipped... clean hit... horrible call Do you even understand what we are arguing about? How was that hit clean? If Roy Williams did it, you will would be shouting how he is the dirtiest player in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlitzFiftySix Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Def helmet to helmet or leading with the helmet. No matter how you slice it.... it was a good call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I think we are missing the point here. Players lead with their helmets all the time and it rarely gets called. I'm not saying that it was called because Ryan Clark plays for the Redskins. The point I am trying to make is that there is no consistency at all on this leading with the helmet call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeNoRevs Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I think we are missing the point here. Players lead with their helmets all the time and it rarely gets called.I'm not saying that it was called because Ryan Clark plays for the Redskins. The point I am trying to make is that there is no consistency at all on this leading with the helmet call. I have seen it called alot more this year in the NFL. But your right, in the past it hasnt been called with much consistancy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I have seen it called alot more this year in the NFL. But your right, in the past it hasnt been called with much consistancy I have always said that someone is going to get seriously injured and then we will have that call 10 times a game because they will be "cracking down". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I'm a Redskins fan and all, but that was clearly leading with the helmet. That penalty isn't there to protect the hitee, its to protect the hitter. Clarck could have broke his friggin neck. His head clearly hit first. I think thats what the refs flagged it for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I saw a non-call hit from a bears defender on Donald Driver this weekend that made Clarks hit look mild. It was clearly helmet to helmet, and it was a spear move. No flag, no call, no nothing. The John Lynch syndrome. One guy can get in trouble for a mild hit, but other guys get away with murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgiaredskin Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Carter's ears are in his neck? :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.