Proposed rule change on defenseless player

[SoBlue128]

You can barely breathe on the QB as it is and now another advantage. This is why QB’s that run have such a huge advantage you can’t hit them because they slide and you’re screwed. If you do.

 

[MarcusRock]

I may be wrong but I think the hits on a "defenseless" receiver need to be to the head for the penalty to be called. Otherwise way too many times when a defender is trying to jar the ball loose it would be a flag.

Correct!

RULE 12
SECTION 2 PERSONAL FOULS
ARTICLE 9. PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE.
.
.
(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the
initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle
the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;
(2) lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part 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 to initiate forcible contact against any
part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be
a defenseless player, as defined in Article 9).​

 

[G2]

Just make it 2 hand touch already....

 

[Direwolf63]

No need for ejections.

But they should be reviewed.

 

[terra]

Yes, that play you speak of took place a few plays after this one. But a QB doesn't need his head for anything. Lol.

that is a perfect example of why nothing you have to post is worth a bucket of warm spit

 

[trickblue]

No way... too easy to control game outcomes...

 

[MarcusRock]

that is a perfect example of why nothing you have to post is worth a bucket of warm spit

If you're standing around long enough to fill a bucket with spit that you keep warm somehow, you have bigger problems than I thought upstairs.

 

[Chuck 54]

No way! 15 yard penalty is enough.
The game is fast paced. Crap happens that players don’t intend….penalize.
If after review, officials believe there was an attempt at injuring the other player or an intentional targeting of the head, then sure….eject the player. But I’ll also argue that any rule that can result in ejection should also include roster expansion so the entire game doesn’t become a joke.

 

[Mannix]

I would understand it if it was a repeat offense. You know, like it is now?

They need less to judge, not more. This will change the game with regard to hitting a QB. It's already shady with the slide rule.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bold above is statement of the week!!!

 

[ghst187]

Just put target jerseys on the QBs….touch them and the play is dead. Although might ruin the careers of Hurtz and Lamar..

 

[Mannix]

The onside kick limitation rule may be the single most asinine rule ever...NFL stands for No Fun League. I just made that up.

 

[805BoysInBlue]

Bad idea to put more of the game in the refs hands. These dudes are already bad at their job, imagine allowing them to dictate if a player can stay or should be ejected.

 

[DandyDon52]

WE have no say in any changes.

 

[Flamma]

I never understand this "defenseless player," stuf anyways. Wasnt Gallup defenseless on the TD that wasnt? He was up , made the catch and got drilled before he even came back onthe ground. Is that not defenseless? Please explain to me how that is not defenseless?

They call it sometimes. For example, a WR running down the sideline, if a safety hits him as he's catching the pass, he'll probably get flagged.

 

[Flamma]

I do think all personal fouls should be reviewed, because half or more of the roughing the passer calls are wrong. But why do they find the need for ejections on every call? Is the gameplay still too rough in their opinion?

 

[Flamma]

No need for ejections.

But they should be reviewed.

They probably mean review every flag of that type for ejection, not to overturn the call.

 

[TequilaCowboy]

I never understand this "defenseless player," stuf anyways. Wasnt Gallup defenseless on the TD that wasnt? He was up , made the catch and got drilled before he even came back onthe ground. Is that not defenseless? Please explain to me how that is not defenseless?

Defenseless players is too general of a rule. Sure, there are obvious ones but you are now seeing all these one handed catches due to defensive players letting up on a hit or a tackle. By today's rules you could argue that Gallup hit on a possible TD was hitting a defenseless player. The ref of course did not call it, but could have. Bet if Gallup would not have gotten up, a flag would have been thrown.

 

[Reid1boys]

The league rulebook currently dictates a penalty be called if a player “initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.” The category spans 11 different manifestations, including a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass; a receiver attempting a catch “who has not had time to clearly become a runner.


If that is the rule, hw the hell was the hit on Gallup, when he didnt even have a chance to put his second foot on the ground NOT hitting a defenseless player? If got no problem with the rule, but if the rule is as explained here, it clearly should have been a penalty on the Gallup hit.

 

[Kevinicus]

The league rulebook currently dictates a penalty be called if a player “initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.” The category spans 11 different manifestations, including a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass; a receiver attempting a catch “who has not had time to clearly become a runner.


If that is the rule, hw the hell was the hit on Gallup, when he didnt even have a chance to put his second foot on the ground NOT hitting a defenseless player? If got no problem with the rule, but if the rule is as explained here, it clearly should have been a penalty on the Gallup hit.

The rule is much much longer than that small sentence fragment. It specifies what kind of contact is not allowed. Nothing against the rules on the Gallup play.

1. Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
   1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him
   2. lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body
   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 to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)

Note: The first "1." should be a "b." but the automatic formatting changes it.

 

[leeblair]

They may as well make it touch football. The coaching has gotten so pathetic that they need rule changes to protect their prima donnas instead of coaching that teaches them how to prevent injuries.
The ONLY reason defensive ends are so dangerous is because the NFL puts emphasis on scoring, so coaches no longer want to keep an extra back in the backfield to block. They prefer an extra receiver in the game to promote offense.
It's poor coaching, plain and simple, fueled by the league's quest for ratings.