CFZ Basham and Williams Roughing the Passer Flags and Rule

[TwentyOne]

Click this link for the complete rule and entire examples video.

In the old days, defensive players could stuff the quarterback. The old days are dead in the NFL. They will never return.

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 11, subparagraph b: A rushing defender is prohibited from committing such intimidating and punishing acts as “stuffing” a passer into the ground or unnecessarily wrestling or driving him down after the passer has thrown the ball, even if the rusher makes his initial contact with the passer within the one-step limitation...

Tackling/sacking the quarterback is a mental exercise in 2022. It's not 1972 anymore. The NFL does not want its quarterbacks pounded through the ground. The rule is an irritation if the player is not intentionally trying to injure the quarterback but not THINKING beforehand will result in a braindead penalty and should fall primarily on the player's shoulders only in my opinion.

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 11, subparagragh c: A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in a defenseless posture... (2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on a passer.

On the other hand, I believe coaches and player bear equal responsibility for erasing this tendency from inside the player's head. All the player needs to do is keep his head up. You must see who you are going to hit anyway. Eyes up. Less chance of a stupid penalty. Eyes down. Almost always a braindead penalty because the refs do not give a flip what part of the helmet hits ANY part of the quarterback's body.

Now you can think if the new rules whatever you want. I too dont like the way they change the game to a more contactless kind of sport. But what can i do.

To me Bashams tackle is a flag without question. If he would have let go from the legs during the tackle or showed at least to try to get away with his shoulder this might have not been one.
But he clearly hangs on to the legs until he finishes his tackle and he drives the QB to the ground with his shoulder thru the whole process of the tackle.
Not a question for me, this is a flag.

Now Williams is a bit harder to decide. To me it is still a flag. Just because right before the tackle he turns his head towards the QBs chest. He clearly shows he wants to make contact with his helmet first. Thats the flag for me. If he wouldnt have done that i wouldnt have thrown a flag.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

This is a poll now?

The Basham play was a clear foul. While he didn't land with all his body weight, he hit a QB who was in a defenseless posture and wrapped up his legs to boot. Technically, both plays could fall under the rule below.

From the same Rule 12, Section 2:

ARTICLE 9. PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player
who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass (passing posture).​

The Williams one is the snap judgment call because he clearly did lower his head and the rule says "any part of the helmet" so it doesn't have to be the crown only, but was it incidental to a clean, permitted hit or are they saying defenseless posture? I'd allow that one since it wasn't late and he didn't wrap up but that's just me.

And the rule also points to incidental helmet hits not being prohibited, as the physics of the tackle lead to this being a possibility when the tackle occurs. Therefore, imo, the Williams tackle should not have been called.

 

[DallasEast]

This is a poll now?

The Basham play was a clear foul. While he didn't land with all his body weight, he hit a QB who was in a defenseless posture and wrapped up his legs to boot. Technically, both plays could fall under the rule below.

From the same Rule 12, Section 2:

ARTICLE 9. PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player
who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass (passing posture).​

The Williams one is the snap judgment call because he clearly did lower his head and the rule says "any part of the helmet" so it doesn't have to be the crown only, but was it incidental to a clean, permitted hit or are they saying defenseless posture? I'd allow that one since it wasn't late and he didn't wrap up but that's just me.

WELCOME TO THE THREAD MARCUSROCK! I wondered if you would join the party.

 

[MarcusRock]

And the rule also points to incidental helmet hits not being prohibited, as the physics of the tackle lead to this being a possibility when the tackle occurs. Therefore, imo, the Williams tackle should not have been called.

Yes, that's what I meant by incidental. I think they got him because he lowered his head but when you're trying to accelerate to hit before he releases the ball, it's what's natural to do.

 

[MarcusRock]

WELCOME TO THE THREAD MARCUSROCK! I wondered if you would join the party.

Lol. Had to pay respects to anyone breaking out the rule book. I think it's a good thing whether folks agree or disagree.

 

[DallasEast]

Lol. Had to pay respects to anyone breaking out the rule book. I think it's a good thing whether folks agree or disagree.

I do not always agree with your interpretations but you never disappoint in making rules discussions interesting.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Just to add to my point about, if the NFL were to adopt rugby rules more throughout, here are the rugby laws on tackling based on the English rugby system (and is present in most rugby leagues and unions) that would be relevant to the NFL. https://www.englandrugby.com/participation/playing/headcase/concussion-prevention

Law 9 includes the following:

• Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others.
• A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.
• A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.
• A player must not tackle, charge, pull, push or grasp an opponent whose feet are off the ground.
• A player must not lift an opponent off the ground and drop or drive that player so that their head and/or upper body make contact with the ground.
• Dangerous play in a ruck or maul - A player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders.

Thus, if the NFL were to more thriughly adopt rugby laws, then there is no way Williams gets called for a foul on his tackle. To me, these rules are a bit clearer. The attempt to hit the QB wasn't reckless. It was not a late hit. He doesn't hit him above the shoulders. He doesn't lift the feet of the player when he's taking him down. By and large, even in rugby where there aren't any pads, that's a clean hit by Williams. Further, based on my understanding of the NFL rules, that shouldn't have been a foul. Perhaps that's a foul they called on him because it's preseason but wouldn't call in the regular season.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Yes, that's what I meant by incidental. I think they got him because he lowered his head but when you're trying to accelerate to hit before he releases the ball, it's what's natural to do.

Exactly, which is why, to me, that shouldn't have been called. I'll chalk that one up, hopefully, as one that they called because it's preseason. The referees do normally call things more harshly in preseason. Perhaps that's all the referee was trying to get across with that hit.

 

[Jarntt]

I'm not the only one saying so, and since the "I don't wanna believe it, so it can't be true" argument rarely works, why don't you tell me what spearing is.

"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."

Was it forcible contact? I can't see how it could be seen as such.

 

[CowboyFrog]

And all of the rules would be looked at in good faith by me if they would change the first and actually proven thing to help which is get rid of any Turf fields and make them all real grass on real dirt..THEN get into making players hit smaller boxes and literally do matrix moves in the middle of trying to tackle someone.

 

[DallasEast]

And all of the rules would be looked at in good faith by me if they would change the first and actually proven thing to help which is get rid of any Turf fields and make them all real grass on real dirt..THEN get into making players hit smaller boxes and literally do matrix moves in the middle of trying to tackle someone.

Great. Just great. Now I will go through the rest of my day yelling "Trinity! Help!" at NOBODY and bending my body at the waist in slow motion.

 

[MarcusRock]

"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."

Was it forcible contact? I can't see how it could be seen as such.

Not sure which play y'all are talking about but both were forcible contact to me because they used their bodies to level the hit. Had either of them gotten there and just shoved with their arms, I wouldn't call that forcible contact.

 

[America's Cowboy]

I believe thread responses have established there is a difference of opinion what "driving into the ground" means for different people. The video I posted of Isaiah Stanback, for example, illustrates one perspective. He immediately agreed Basham drove the quarterback into the ground with the tackle. Neither Babe Laufenberg nor Bill Jones disagreed with his assessment.

Tackling is a subject I have talked about many years on the forum. My own opinion was shaped by playing the game and decades of watching the game at all levels. Others, who have disagreed with my takes on tackling, have played the game and watched high school, college and professional games also. It continually fascinates me how brains behind different sets of eyes process what we all see.

When did Isaiah Stanback ever play Defense? How would he know if never laid out hits and tackles for a living?

 

[DallasEast]

When did Isaiah Stanback ever play Defense? How would he know if never laid out hits and tackles for a living?

Whoa whoa whoa. Maybe I am misunderstanding.

Isaiah Stanback's evaluation of the play is invalid because he played offense?

So, it should be assumed any football broadcaster, who only played on one side of the ball during their career, cannot make an accurate assessment of a play on that same side of the ball?

Is that correct?

 

[Jarntt]

Not sure which play y'all are talking about but both were forcible contact to me because they used their bodies to level the hit. Had either of them gotten there and just shoved with their arms, I wouldn't call that forcible contact.

Williams and the question is about forcible contact with his head. That didn't happen

 

[CCBoy]

Click this link for the complete rule and entire examples video.

In the old days, defensive players could stuff the quarterback. The old days are dead in the NFL. They will never return.

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 11, subparagraph b: A rushing defender is prohibited from committing such intimidating and punishing acts as “stuffing” a passer into the ground or unnecessarily wrestling or driving him down after the passer has thrown the ball, even if the rusher makes his initial contact with the passer within the one-step limitation...

Tackling/sacking the quarterback is a mental exercise in 2022. It's not 1972 anymore. The NFL does not want its quarterbacks pounded through the ground. The rule is an irritation if the player is not intentionally trying to injure the quarterback but not THINKING beforehand will result in a braindead penalty and should fall primarily on the player's shoulders only in my opinion.

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 11, subparagragh c: A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in a defenseless posture... (2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on a passer.

On the other hand, I believe coaches and player bear equal responsibility for erasing this tendency from inside the player's head. All the player needs to do is keep his head up. You must see who you are going to hit anyway. Eyes up. Less chance of a stupid penalty. Eyes down. Almost always a braindead penalty because the refs do not give a flip what part of the helmet hits ANY part of the quarterback's body.

That enforcement line is as smart as eliminating the rule that the ground can not create a fumble...real since out of the picture. 'Rocket science' for sure.

 

[Runwildboys]

"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."

Was it forcible contact? I can't see how it could be seen as such.

Did he hit him hard enough to knock him down?

 

[Runwildboys]

Williams and the question is about forcible contact with his head. That didn't happen

If you watch the video in this thread, you see that the QB's body folds a little right where the helmet hits him in the gut. That looks like forcible contact to me.

 

[Jarntt]

Did he hit him hard enough to knock him down?

with his head? No

 

[MarcusRock]

Williams and the question is about forcible contact with his head. That didn't happen

Hard to tell if the helmet was the lead thing plus it's complicated by the QB turning into Williams with his throw but I think what got the officials' attention was Williams dropping his head which is in the rules. The other thing about Williams is he did a mini-launching of himself if you look at his legs and feet leave the ground. That's pretty much forcible contact. Again, I wouldn't call it because he wasn't late and didn't wrap up but it is borderline helmet initiation while using forcible contact.