OT: Amendola helmet to head contact, no ejection?
- Thread starter simons96
- Start date
You beat me to it...Patriots are NFL golden boys-rules don't apply to them. It's BS
Just started watching and haven't seen the replay just heard them talking about it. Did he hit him in the shoulder or directly to the head. Have to look up replay.
Give him a break. He didn't have much time to prepare for this game. The league wouldn't delay it for him.
KC punted the ball from about the 40 yd line. coverage was right about the 2 yard line.
the receiver gave up on the ball and the KC coverage guy was standing at the 2 yard line looking up to catch the ball and down it
Amendola hit him square in the jaw with his helmet. dirtiest shot I've seen all season.
If that doesn't, this will...So will this play be bushwoods next 25 posts? I kid.
Shazier was not fined for his hit.
NFL is in a bind. If they come down on the Pat's, they will only cheat again and hold the League hostage in a very public way. Might even sign another serial murderer!
It's in New England. Home of the tuck rule. Don't argue with them or they'll have a tight end kill you.
When is the last time an NFL player has been ejected for a helmet to head contact? You're thinking of the college rule.
For clarification purposes, a personal foul was called on Amendola. I'm sure he will be fined. There is no automatic ejection rule in the NFL. It was a cheap play by a 180lb punt returner. Was it worse than this? I'm sure yinz wanted him suspended too
Near identical hit that Shazier applied to Bernard including dropping his helmet bring the crown to bear right before impact and delivering the blow directly to the head.
Wrong the Unnecessary Roughness rule, 12-2-6i ("i" names Spearing - e.g., hitting with crown of helmet - as one of the illegal acts of the rule) specifically states under the enforcement section that the offender can be ejected if the Officials deem his actions "flagrant".
Right on cue, you bring out the corpse of that poor horse and start pounding on it again. So predictable. I know you can't resist replying, so have at it.
I don't think the hit by Amendola was anywhere close to Shazier's hit on Bernard last week.
I'm not sure if the links below will work but I grabbed three screenshots of the Amendola hit from the replays. The main point of impact was the defender's shoulder, not his head. These screen grabs don't show the sequence but the defender's head does not snap back from the contact as (I think) it would from a direct contact.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uvcixjzzp2ksb2e/Screen Shot 2016-01-17 at 12.55.26 AM.png?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/71qy70khy2fw2l7/Screen Shot 2016-01-17 at 12.56.42 AM.png?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pipefr6qqbl0l8m/Screen Shot 2016-01-17 at 12.58.34 AM.png?dl=0
Big difference is Defenseless (head looking up) vs. not defenseless (running the ball) as in Shaziers case.
Although it was interesting to note that hitting a defenseless player can only be called on the defense. Which is why this penalty on Amendola was called "unnecessary roughness" instead. At least that's what I think Fouts said.
Although it was interesting to note that hitting a defenseless player can only be called on the defense. Which is why this penalty on Amendola was called "unnecessary roughness" instead. At least that's what I think Fouts said.
I heard the same thing about the defenseless player rule not applying to the defender. From what they said later, this is the Heinz Ward rule that on offensive plalyer can't block when they are moving back toward your own endzone (i.e. no blindside hits moving in that direction).
The OP said this hit was worse than anything in the Steelers game last week. I don't think this was anywhere near as dangerous as the direct helmet-to-helmet hit that Shazier put on Bernard last week and it was absolutely nowhere close to the hit by Burfict on Antonio Brown.
The penalty was announced by the Referee over his microphone to the National audience and he clearly announced "Unnecessary Roughness" which is Article 6 - Unnecessary Roughness (illegal acts "a" through "j") of Section 2 - Personal Fouls of Rule 12 - Player Conduct, IOW, Rule 12-2-6(a-j). Illegal Act "i" of the rule names Spearing (intentionally using the helmet to initiate contact by ramming, etc... Spearing is also declared illegal in its own separate rule, Rule 12-2-8 in the NFL Rulebook). Fauts correctly identified the penalty on the play - Spearing (initiating contact with crown of helmet when Amendola intentionally lowered his head just before hit to initiate contact with crown of helmet into KC player's lower facemask area). Spearing is illegal act "I" named in "Unnecessary Roughness" Personal Foul Penalty, Rule 12-2-6i.
The "rules expert" who attempted to correct Fauts and claim it was as a "Peel Back" Block violation was, and is, full of $hit - Illegal "Peel Back" Block is Rule 12-2-4 of NFL Rulebook - "Unnecessary Roughness" is Rule 12-2-6(a-j) which is what the Referee unmistakably called out on his nationally broadcast microphone. Furthermore, the "Defenseless Receiver Rule", Rule 12-2-7 is a completely separate rule, has nothing to do with what the Referee clearly called and can only be applied to situations where an offensive player is attempting to catch the ball.
Fauts was 100% correct as to what the Referee subsequently and unmistakably called - violation of Rule 12-2-6i of the "Unnecessary Roughness - Personal Foul" penalty - the supposed "NFL rules expert" had it 100% wrong and did not even cite the correct penalty that the Referee clearly announced. Amendola's hit was identical to Shazier's in every regard except being slightly lower and less direct of a head-shot. Both were clearly illegal under the "No Spearing" rules Rule 12-2-8 and 12-2-6i which have existed since the advent of Personal Fouls in the "modern era" of football unlike the false claims of the "Defenseless Receiver Rule" being germaine which was only established in 2013 and was not the rule which was clearly broken - e.g., Spearing - in either case.
In regards to your first paragraph, the supposed "rules expert" that attempted to correct Fauts was full of $hit and clearly trying to obfuscate another UNNECESSARY SPEARING HIT in back-to-back weeks. The Referee unmistakably announced "Unnecessary Roughness" as the penalty which is Rule 12-2-6(a-j). The "Illegal 'Peel Back' Block" rule (this is the title of the rule in NFL Rulebook) is Rule 12-2-4 a completely separate and distinct rule from the rule the Referee unmistakably announced, "Unnecessary Roughness", which is Rule 12-2-6(a-j). Furthermore, Fouts was 100% correct in regards to which part of that rule was clearly violated, illegal act "I" which is a prohibition against "Spearing" - intentionally using crown of helmet to unnecessarily and illegally ram opponent.
As to your second paragraph, agreed both of the hits you referenced in last week's Steelers-Bengals game were worse and while Shazier's hit was near identical to Amendola's, it was worse because it was more of a direct head-shot which was square to Bernard's head whereas Amendola's was on lower part of facemask such that head glanced into shoulder area. However, this was only by luck, not design, as Amendola was clearly "head-hunting" with an illegal UNNECESSARY hit that is punishable up to ejection for flagrancy and he should have probably been ejected if the Officials want to make players understand that these bull$hit, UNNECESSARY, illegal and dangerous hits will not be tolerated (especially head-hunting bull$hit like all of the hits the past two weeks by Burfect, Shazier and now Amedola! Gee, good thing the NFL has gotten serious about these UNNECESSARY, illegal, career & life theatening "cheap-shot" artist hits....sadly LMFAO....the NFL and its officials are to blame more than any other party by not sending any kind of strong message that this crap, thug-behavior is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. What a disgrace the last 2 weeks have been after all the bad publicity the NFL has been getting on this topic....and they're still going light on offenders and rationalizing completely unnecessary, illegal and bull$hit thug-behavior "cheapshots"....disgraceful).
The NFL and Goodell NEEDS to clean up their product!!! Cheap shots above the shoulders and the taunting is so out of control its sickening! I heard this comment at work, and I thought it hit the proverbial "nail on the head".........the street mentality has hit the playing field! I hope the owners aren't too embarassed with their product.
I think the cheapness of the shot on that particular play was especially egregious.
when is the last time you saw the punt returner give up on the punt, then turn around and level the coverage team? Jamell Fleming was the LITERAL definition of defenseless. One could argue that a receiver going for a reception over the middle of the field, or a RB catching a pass in the flat, is at least expecting contact.
Yea, I do agree with that sentiment especially given that he then delivered an illegal "Spear", "Personal Foul - Unnecessary Roughness" cheapshot to the KC player's head. Why he wasn't ejected for that gratuitous, UNNECESSARY, career-threatening, cheapshot is well beyond me. Perfect example of the NFL going light on this nonsense (e.g., their own worst enemy and the chickens are coming home to roost on the topic for the NFL as the last 2 weeks demonstrate). Because of where it happened, the blatant illegal, cheapshot cost NE a yard and a half of field position....wow, you're really going to get their attention with that severe penalty....sadly LMFAO at the lameness of the NFL Administration and team owners who have not only let this $hit go on, but encouraged it for "free marketing" via the media purposes - they're finding out that not all attention, including negative attention, is really good for exposure....
just to stir the pot, I wonder if Amendola will even get a suspension, given the nature of the "team" for whom he plays (cue all the old white racism deniers):
just to stir the pot, I wonder if Amendola will even get a suspension, given the nature of the "team" for whom he plays (cue all the old white racism deniers):
simons96 - The hit by Amendola was nothing close to Burfict's (sp?) hit on Brown and you embarrass yourself by claiming this twice and then playing "the race card" on top of that.
The act of the block by Amendola was a reasonable and legal part of the play to try to let the ball bounce into the endzone. The execution of the block was not and deserved the penalty. The contact was not helmet-to-helmet as you suggest. If the primary contact had been like that, the defender's head would have whipped much like Brown's last week. That didn't happen here - at least not as I saw it on replay or in the pics I posted.
...and Go Pats!!
5 conference championship games in a row and 10 out of 15. Other teams have had better short runs (Steelers winning 4 out of 6 Super Bowls) but I don't think any other football team has shown this kind of success over this long of a period.
5 conference championship games in a row and 10 out of 15. Other teams have had better short runs (Steelers winning 4 out of 6 Super Bowls) but I don't think any other football team has shown this kind of success over this long of a period.
If Fleming didn't expect contact, then he should learn the rules of the game. Blocking the coverage is legal and ihappens and it is
Vulgarity does not add to your credibility. I have generally agreed with your posts, particularly about the BoT and related topics. I guess a person must agree with you to not be a "POS"? That's pretty weak.
Good luck this afternoon. As much as I like the Steelers (and I do), a win next week over the Steelers would be just a little more fun after this pleasant exchange. You do not represent your team or their fans well.
And FWIW, I still haven't seen a thing from you that supports your position that it was such a brutal hit ... just a lot of bluster.
BTW, rem524 excuse-anything the Patriots do is proven unmistakably and unequivocally wrong in the imbedded video of THIS WaPo ARTICLE - "See the cheap shot that earned Patriots’ Danny Amendola a flag".
Amendola CLEARLY lowers his head at the last moment INTENTIONALLY bring the crown of his helmet to bear as the focal point of contact and the initial contact is into the lower RH portion of his face mask and then into the upper RH portion of KC players shoulder/chest. Absolutely no doubt that this is a violation of illegal act "i" ("Spearing") of the "Unnecessary Roughness - Personal Foul" penalty, Rule 12-2-6i, (a penalty that can result in EJECTION if deemed "flagrant"). The infraction called had nothing to do with Rule 12-2-4 "Illegal 'Peel Back' Block" as the poster is attempting to claim - not what was called....IOW, the Pats-fan poster is full of $hit and doesn't know what he's talking about OR MORE LIKELY is making up bull$hit rationalizations and excuses for a clearly illegal, UNNECESSARY, player-safety threatening, bull$hit, dirty, "cheap-shot" that only punks and thugs engage in!
Being dead wrong about the penalty that was called most certainly doesn't enhance "your credibility" moron! LMFAO! The guy who doesn't even have the infraction called correct and a fan of the guilty team has more "credibility"? Okay, whatever you say BroFessor, LMFAO....
BTW, Amendola is full of $hit in regards to his claim - he was flagged for INTENTIONALLY hitting with the crown of his helmet under illegal act "i" of the "Unnecessary Roughness - Personal Foul" Penalty - e.g., Rule 12-2-6i. Here is the Rule as written in the Official 2015 NFL Rulebook:
***************************************************************************
Rule 12-2-6i
ARTICLE 6. UNNECESSARY ROUGHNESS
There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to:
i. using any part of a player’s helmet or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily
Penalty: For unnecessary roughness: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is judged by the official(s) to be flagrant. If the foul is by the defense, it is also an automatic first down.
Note: When in question about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactics, the covering official(s) should always call unnecessary roughness.
***************************************************************************
Amendola clearly intentionally hit with his crown as identified by dropping his head to bring the crown to bear just before impact -- there is absolutely no question about it as the video clearly shows him doing this illegal action under 12-2-6i right before impact (if that is not intentionally using the crown of your helmet to "ram", ditto Shazier's, I don't know what is! So if Amendola is claiming that they are being "taught" to deliver this ILLEGAL method of hitting and that intentional "Spearing" is "legal", perhaps the NFL needs to have a little discussion with the Patriots coaching staff which is telling players a CLEARLY illegal and UNNECESSARY, highly-dangerous method of hitting to "player safety" is "legal".
Franklin - You did notice that I said the penalty was correct, right? Blocking a defender on a punt is legal. Blocking by spearing is not.
If I'm wrong on something, correct me. Attacking because you disagree is just wrong. I've been respectful in every post. You and another can't say the same.
And thus I end up on the wrong side of a topic and firmly in the cross hairs of the name calling attackers who bully those who disagree. I leave this thread to you. You guys can have the last word. I'm sure you don't care but I think much less of this board.
If I'm wrong on something, correct me. Attacking because you disagree is just wrong. I've been respectful in every post. You and another can't say the same.
And thus I end up on the wrong side of a topic and firmly in the cross hairs of the name calling attackers who bully those who disagree. I leave this thread to you. You guys can have the last word. I'm sure you don't care but I think much less of this board.
Really, because Amendola claims in the LINKED ARTICLE you responded to that what he did was not only PERFECTLY LEGAL, but what he has been COACHED TO DO BY THE PATRIOTS COACHING STAFF! You effectively responded that Amendola and the Patriots (who are appealing any fine) were correct in their/his assertions that the play was a legal block which is CONTRADICTORY TO REALITY and Rule 12-2-6i (NO SPEARING especially of the INTENTIONAL VARIETY) - and the penalty is enforceable up to EJECTION for "flagrancy" and it doesn't get much more "flagrant" than what Amendola did in INTENTIONALLY lowering his head bringing the crown of his helmet to bear as the focal point of impact! You can't have it both ways my friend - it was either a clearly illegally and well known "dirty" cheap-shot (that has ALWAYS been a Personal Foul and considered a "head-hunting", dirty, UNNECESSARY hit meant to put an opponents career and health in danger) OR it wasn't.....it can't be both "Mr. Credibility".
