https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/...2ea373eec866a5
I get that it has a relatively high injury rate, but I'm not sure how a smaller player is going to bring down a larger one from behind anymore.
Printable View
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/...2ea373eec866a5
I get that it has a relatively high injury rate, but I'm not sure how a smaller player is going to bring down a larger one from behind anymore.
Dive for the ankles?Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
Jump on their back and trip them?Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
It will be interesting how teams teach tackling technique to still be effective but not get penalized.
I say we go back to when nobody used the forward pass. That was football!
https://footballscoop.com/.image/ar_..._33909_pm0.jpg
THAT, was rugbyQuote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
They actually did it, damn. I thought the opposition from the players would prevent the stupidity from the rules committee.
The technique was used on 0.5% of plays last year. And that was up 65% from the year before. I don't think it's going to be that big of a change for most players. I think the NFL is trying to get rid of it before it becomes a common technique.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
I don't understand how they define it different from far more tackles. I hope this isn't something that seems good in theory but is shit in practice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
That's just it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
First of all, it's so difficult to define precisely that a lot of the times it is called, a replay will show that it was in fact a legal tackle. It's such a controversial topic, every time it gets flagged, the TV broadcast will show slow-motion replays, and if the call was wrong, explain in detail how the refs got it wrong yet again. And it's probably going to be similar to pass interference in the sense that in a lot of cases, if the play is not flagged, the defense gets a third down stop and forces a punt - but the penalty makes it a first down.
Or a tackle that should have been flagged under the new rule isn't whistled down, and a drive that (under the rule) should have been stopped gets a fresh set of downs and stays alive because the refs were inconsistent.
How many times does that have to happen before the fans become outraged again over the "poor officiating", and start complaining that the games are rigged?
This is a rule that appears to be very subjective in interpretaion, but at the same time very consequential for the teams. I don't envy the officials at all, because they're going to be put into a very, very bad position. There are already way too many rules that are difficult to get right in real time and easy to make the wrong call on. They're going to take a lot of heat on this, esspecially the first few weeks of the season.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
I saw the video explanation and it’s pretty easy to spot.
There's no clear line between a legal tackle and an illegal tackle. There will be times it's really fucking obvious. Then there will be all the debatable situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fosco33
Pass interference is even easier to spot sitting at on the coach watching a replay. How many times is that called wrong?
Given it wasn’t really a type of tackle since the last few years it seems kinda easy. You bear hug, jump and in the air use your body weight to bring the defender down.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
As it wasn’t used much before the other rule changes (to the head/neck or lower leg) - I get the issue of ‘old man yelling at grass’. And as a guy who played defense - it sucks.
But it’s like once/game and lead to one injury a week.
These tackles are not newQuote:
Originally Posted by Fosco33
A bunch of people reviewing film making a determination is not the same as calls being made on game day. Maybe if it was a fineable offense and nothing more.
By gut says it’ll be as often as horsecollar, tripping, etc.
There’s a lot of rules that people have to abide by that aren’t very common fouls.
Feels like nothingburger
I could show you a video explaining PI and it would be really easy to spot. I just won't show you the more iffy examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fosco33
It would have to be a pretty long video. I think whether a tackle is a hp drop tackle has a more specific definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobblehead
ARTICLE 1. DEFINITION
It is pass interference by either team when any act by a player more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders an eligible player’s opportunity to catch the ball
ARTICLE 2. PROHIBITED ACTS BY BOTH TEAMS WHILE THE BALL IS IN THE AIR
Acts that are pass interference include, but are not limited to:
Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch;
Playing through the back of an opponent in an attempt to make a play on the ball;
Grabbing an opponent’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass;
Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, and regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing the ball;
Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball;
Hooking an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the opponent’s body to turn prior to the ball arriving; or
Initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off, thus creating separation.
Note: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.
ARTICLE 3. PERMISSIBLE ACTS BY BOTH TEAMS WHILE THE BALL IS IN THE AIR
Acts that are permissible by a player include, but are not limited to:
Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.
Inadvertent tangling of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.
Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players, except as specified in 8-3-2 and 8-5-4 pertaining to blocking downfield by the offense.
Laying a hand on an opponent that does not restrict him in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
Contact by a player who has gained position on an opponent in an attempt to catch the ball.
Notes:
Possibly. When the horse collar rule came out, it seemed really easy to see and even easier for a player to avoid. This one doesn't feel that way to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fosco33
It’ll be like most rules and they’ll throw flags for first 4 games and it might affect a game.
But most likely it’ll be used for retrospective fines and not flags.
It’s not like they got rid of extra points (they should) or changed the OT to more college like rules (I’d also say is better).
One difference I see is that a horsecollar is pretty much a horsecollar. It's difficult to accidentally horsecollar a guy. Possible, sure (we've probably all seen it happen), but when a defender realizes he's got the wrong grip, he can quickly let go and at least have a chance to avoid the flag. Like an accidental facemask.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
But with this "hip drop" tackle, I can see a number of ways for a defender to partially lose his grip and slide down a bit while the ballcarrier struggles to break free, and the tackler to land on the lower legs without being able to do anything to stop it. Or a perfectly clean, legal tackle where the tackler and ballcarrier just fall awkwardly, and pow! 15 yards and an automatic first down. And there's not a thing the tackler can do at that point, even let go.
It's not like that's going to happen frequently, but it will happen. And at some point, it's going to cost a team a game. Fans are going to be pissed, the refs will be torched in the press, and people will accuse the league of fixing games. If it does significantly improve player safety, then that's obviously not an all-bad thing. I'm just skeptical that the unintended consequences won't backfire and outweigh the good it does.
Edit: But then again, maybe this is all a big noise about nothing at all. A lot of people in the thread obviously think so; I can't say they're wrong, and there's at least as good a chance that they're right as there is that I'm right. We'll know in a few months. I'm just really damned skeptical of every single thing the league does these days - every single time, it seems to come down (in some way) to making more money for the billionaires as opposed to actually making a better product for the fans. And the game usually seems to wind up somewhat worse for it. I just don't trust Roger Goodell any further than I could spit a burning porcupine.