Creeper
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 13,971
- Reaction score
- 17,741
There are two issues here, completely separate:
1. Helmet to helmet
2. Blindside block
The former applies to any LEADING with the helmet on any play, including a RB with the ball initiating contact by leading with the helmet. People are pretending like this was a dirty play because of this type of contact which is STANDARD for any linemen on any block, as the GIFs demonstrate. If one is going to argue from this point, that the hit by Tyron Smith was DIRTY period.
As far as the second rule, this was not a BLINDSIDE block, as the note under the rule states. That is in reality what the rule is discussing, not any block that occurs parallel or towards the end-zone of the blocker. That situation for example is found when the receiving team of a punt is blocking the punting team from running to the guy receiving the kick.
What makes that blindside so dangerous is that the person getting hit has no way to protect themselves. He’s completely exposed and has no way to know a hit is about to happen.
Both GIFs I showed are demonstrating how asinine this “helmet to helmet” rule is in regards to blocking. This isn’t leading with the helmet as it’s generally understood on the field, blockers do this ALL THE TIME.
To cry about what this TE did, while pretending it was dirty, is bogus.
Again, read the text of the rule:
ARTICLE 7. BLINDSIDE BLOCK
It is a foul if a player initiates a block when his path is toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder.
There are TWO conditions to apply to make it a blindside block. The first is, was the blocker moving parallel to or in the direction of his goal line? The answer in this case is yes. That is indisputable.
The 2nd condition is, did the blocker make forcible contact with his opponent with his helmet, forearm or shoulder? The answer is yes, he made contact with the crown of his helmet to the side of Kearse's helmet. That is also indisputable since it is shown clearly in the video.
Now, there is a note to this rule that states:
Note: It is not a foul for a blindside block if the forcible contact occurs in “close-line play” prior to the ball leaving that area. The ball is not considered to have left that area if the player who takes the snap, either from a shotgun position or from under center, retreats in the pocket immediately or with a slight delay, and hands the ball to another player, or runs with the ball himself. This exception does not apply to any action other than a designed play. Any forcible contact in “close-line play” is still subject to the restrictions for crackback and peel back blocks.
This note applies to blocking that takes place on or near the LOS. But the block in question occurred well behind the line making the note inapplicable.
I am not arguing the call was a good call because I think the rule is a stupid rule. But I will argue that if there rule exists the refs are right to call it. This is a relatively new rule put in to reduce concussions, a big issue for the NFL right now. The rules committee can always change the rule or make it more flexible, but the rule as written was applied correctly in this case.
This rule may be in the same category as the rule that cost the Cowboys a blocked punt, but a the refs applied the rule correctly at that time.