Why do Shazier apologists immediately reference the "Defenseless Receiver" Rule, 12-2-7 when...

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Who cares... if a penalty was called maybe the Bungles go down and score. Then Roethlisberger likely doesnt get hurt to close the 3rd quarter. Without the injury, Bungals likely lose because the Steelers would have had offense in the fourth quarter.

I had no rooting interest in the game in question, but "the Bungles" also lost a player for the rest of the game which was the clear intention of Shazier's "head hunting" clearly illegal SPEAR -- IOW, the result of the illegal hit caused exactly what the rule is there to avoid, UNNECESSARY PLAYER INJURY due to an ILLEGAL SPEAR (it was completely unnecessary for Shazier to "Spear" Bernard when tackling him and he lowered his head delivering it directly into Bernard's head as first point of contact showing the intention to spear). The NFL not delivering a statement that the hit was UNACCEPTABLE PLAYER BEHAVIOR in violation of the No Spearing Rules in both Rule 12-2-8 and 12-2-6i is completely ridiculous and against the NFL's long-term interests as it shows hypocrisy in regards to their seriousness about prioritizing "player safety" from UNNECESSARY, bull$hit, illegal, dirty hits.

 

[SkilletHead2]

I'll try to resolve this peaceably (I have no rooting interest in either side). The rule defines the takle box as "an area extending from tackle to tackle and from three yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team’s end line". Skillethead, try to imagine a box with those boundries. Now, if a player (Bernard) is outside that box, essentially outside the tackles or beyond 3 yards downfield, he is outside the tackle box and not able to be struck with the crown of a tacklers helmet. I hope I have cleared this up.

Hey Woody,

I think you have this right. I was reading this as the runner had to meet both criteria to be outside the tackle box, but the language is clearly defining the tackle box, not the position of the runner. So, the tackle box extends from the tackles and out three yards, all the way back to the offensive team's end line. And once the ball is outside of that, those restrictions no longer apply (as I said, you can't go back in it).

So, that would make the hit illegal. Thanks for that. As I said, I have no interest in this one way or the other -- I thought it should be an illegal hit but wasn't. But, since he was outside the tackles, he's outside the box no matter what, and the crown of the helmet should come into play!

 

[deepelemblues]

If Shazier doesn't lower his head his facemask/forehead of his helmet hits Bernard's helmet and this guy would still be complaining about it. The way they were squared up on each other if Shazier turns to lead with his shoulder he does a Burfict on Brown and this guy would still be complaining about it. It's also obvious that Shazier did not intentionally target Bernard's head, this guy can cry head-hunting all he wants but the tape doesn't lie. That's a regular tackle that knocked Bernard for a loop because Bernard looked the wrong way upfield (to the right towards the sideline instead of straight / slightly to the left) after turning (as you can also see from the video) and didn't see Shazier until the last instant.

It's also impossible to "spear" someone when you have one foot on the ground like Shazier did when contact was initiated.

Hit was both legal and clean and the only incorrect ruling was whistling the play dead just because they couldn't see the ball and Bernard was clearly not gonna be moving for a minute. There's nothing in the rulebook that says all helmet-to-helmet contact outside the tackle box by a defender is illegal with no discretion left to the referees.

If the hit were made inside the tackle box no one except maybe this guy would care. It's optics. A hit in the open field looks worse than one where six other guys are within 5 yards but it's no less likely to injure someone.

The NFL clearly does not actually care when the helmet-to-helmet rule never applies to ballcarriers, never applies to anyone inside the tackle box, and is selectively enforced on defenders in the open field. If the NFL actually wanted to change the way players play to reduce head injuries it would apply to everyone, everywhere, all the time.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

If Shazier doesn't lower his head his facemask/forehead of his helmet hits Bernard's helmet and this guy would still be complaining about it. The way they were squared up on each other if Shazier turns to lead with his shoulder he does a Burfict on Brown and this guy would still be complaining about it. It's also obvious that Shazier did not intentionally target Bernard's head, this guy can cry head-hunting all he wants but the tape doesn't lie. That's a regular tackle that knocked Bernard for a loop because Bernard looked the wrong way upfield (to the right towards the sideline instead of straight / slightly to the left) after turning (as you can also see from the video) and didn't see Shazier until the last instant.

It's also impossible to "spear" someone when you have one foot on the ground like Shazier did when contact was initiated.

Hit was both legal and clean and the only incorrect ruling was whistling the play dead just because they couldn't see the ball and Bernard was clearly not gonna be moving for a minute. There's nothing in the rulebook that says all helmet-to-helmet contact outside the tackle box by a defender is illegal with no discretion left to the referees.

If the hit were made inside the tackle box no one except maybe this guy would care. It's optics. A hit in the open field looks worse than one where six other guys are within 5 yards but it's no less likely to injure someone.

The NFL clearly does not actually care when the helmet-to-helmet rule never applies to ballcarriers, never applies to anyone inside the tackle box, and is selectively enforced on defenders in the open field. If the NFL actually wanted to change the way players play to reduce head injuries it would apply to everyone, everywhere, all the time.

Really? You must not even be able to read the "title" of rule your "Stillers goggles" are so thick (that or you have them wrapped so tight to your head they've cutoff all blood-flow to your brain). The title of Rule 12-2-8 is "ARTICLE 8. INITIATING CONTACT WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET" which is the very definition of "Spearing" as anyone who has ever played football is taught (e.g, "coached") to know and the very reason you are taught to put the "Ridell" emblem on the top of your facemask onto the opposing players sternum, wrap-up and "run through"....(you are specifically taught to tackle with your "head up"...."look at what you hit"....."put the Ridell emblem on the sternum"....etc... because intentionally dropping your head such that the crown of your helmet initiates contact is illegal, called "Spearing", is considered a very dirty "Personal Foul" hit, is subject to a 15 hard major penalty AND potential ejection and is a huge "player safety issue" for both involved parties not just in regard to head trama, but also significant risk of paralysis via "broken neck"). I've posted the ACTUAL rule for you below which defines what "Spearing" is and it clearly says nothing about a requirement to "leave your feet" (pure self-created, supposed-fact bull$hit on your part - why am I not surprised?). What constitutes and makes a hit "Spearing" is intentionally initiating contact with the crown of your helmet as signalled by DROPPING YOUR HEAD just before impact such that the crown of your helmet is the intiating point of contact to where you are delivering it - in this case Shazier very CLEARLY guided his hit to Bernard's head with his eye's forward and square to Bernard and only dropped his head, intentionally delivering the crown of his helmet as the "initiating point of contact" at the last moment - it was "textbook" Spearing as defined by the NFL Rulebook in Rule 12-2-8 (and also prohibited under Rule 12-2-6i, "Personal Foul - Unnecessary Roughness" listed illegal act "i", "Spearing"). BTW rules genius, HERE IS A DEFINITION OF SPEARING provided by a website that provides answers to sports rules questions - they attribute the source of their answer as the NFL Rulebook, note the lack of any necessity to "leave your feet" that you claim and ONLY the necessity that contact is intentionally initiated with the crown of the helmet as signalled by the player dropping his head as he initiates contact focusing the crown as the impact point. Anybody who says Shazier did not unequivocally do this is either blind and has no idea what they're talking about or a "Stillers" fan willing to disregard the truth in defense of the indefensible.

**************************************************************
ARTICLE 8. INITIATING CONTACT WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET

It is a foul if a runner or tackler initiates forcible contact by delivering a blow with the top/crown of his helmet against an opponent when both players are clearly outside the tackle box (an area extending from tackle to tackle and from three yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team’s end line). Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or tackler against an opponent shall not be a foul.

Note: The tackle box no longer exists once the ball leaves the tackle box.

Penalty: Loss of 15 yards. If the foul is by the defense, it is also anautomatic first down. The player may be disqualified if the action is flagrant.
**************************************************************

 

[Omar81]

Really? You must not even be able to read the "title" of rule your "Stillers goggles" are so thick (that or you have them wrapped so tight to your head they've cutoff all blood-flow to your brain). The title of Rule 12-2-8 is "ARTICLE 8. INITIATING CONTACT WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET" which is the very definition of "Spearing" as anyone who has ever played football is taught (e.g, "coached") to know and the very reason you are taught to put the "Ridell" emblem on the top of your facemask onto the opposing players sternum, wrap-up and "run through"....(you are specifically taught to tackle with your "head up"...."look at what you hit"....."put the Ridell emblem on the sternum"....etc... because intentionally dropping your head such that the crown of your helmet initiates contact is illegal, called "Spearing", is considered a very dirty "Personal Foul" hit, is subject to a 15 hard major penalty AND potential ejection and is a huge "player safety issue" for both involved parties not just in regard to head trama, but also significant risk of paralysis via "broken neck"). I've posted the ACTUAL rule for you below which defines what "Spearing" is and it clearly says nothing about a requirement to "leave your feet" (pure self-created, supposed-fact bull$hit on your part - why am I not surprised?). What constitutes and makes a hit "Spearing" is intentionally initiating contact with the crown of your helmet as signalled by DROPPING YOUR HEAD just before impact such that the crown of your helmet is the intiating point of contact to where you are delivering it - in this case Shazier very CLEARLY guided his hit to Bernard's head with his eye's forward and square to Bernard and only dropped his head, intentionally delivering the crown of his helmet as the "initiating point of contact" at the last moment - it was "textbook" Spearing as defined by the NFL Rulebook in Rule 12-2-8 (and also prohibited under Rule 12-2-6i, "Personal Foul - Unnecessary Roughness" listed illegal act "i", "Spearing"). BTW rules genius, HERE IS A DEFINITION OF SPEARING provided by a website that provides answers to sports rules questions - they attribute the source of their answer as the NFL Rulebook, note the lack of any necessity to "leave your feet" that you claim and ONLY the necessity that contact is intentionally initiated with the crown of the helmet as signalled by the player dropping his head as he initiates contact focusing the crown as the impact point. Anybody who says Shazier did not unequivocally do this is either blind and has no idea what they're talking about or a "Stillers" fan willing to disregard the truth in defense of the indefensible.

**************************************************************
ARTICLE 8. INITIATING CONTACT WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET

It is a foul if a runner or tackler initiates forcible contact by delivering a blow with the top/crown of his helmet against an opponent when both players are clearly outside the tackle box (an area extending from tackle to tackle and from three yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team’s end line). Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or tackler against an opponent shall not be a foul.

Note: The tackle box no longer exists once the ball leaves the tackle box.

Penalty: Loss of 15 yards. If the foul is by the defense, it is also anautomatic first down. The player may be disqualified if the action is flagrant.
**************************************************************

So, Franklin -- you've posted repeatedly in this thread, proposing to "teach" those you deem to be less intelligent than you (which in your mind is everyone). You've said virtually the same thing over and over and over again, in your typical condescending fashion. Funny that the NFL's own VP of Officiating COMPLETELY disagrees with you. I'm sure you'll feel compelled to quote rules and criticize him now, but try to face up to the fact that you are WRONG and those you've been ridiculing are CORRECT.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-not-a-violation/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

Enjoy everyone.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

So, Franklin -- you've posted repeatedly in this thread, proposing to "teach" those you deem to be less intelligent than you (which in your mind is everyone). You've said virtually the same thing over and over and over again, in your typical condescending fashion. Funny that the NFL's own VP of Officiating COMPLETELY disagrees with you. I'm sure you'll feel compelled to quote rules and criticize him now, but try to face up to the fact that you are WRONG and those you've been ridiculing are CORRECT.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-not-a-violation/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

Enjoy everyone.

Wow, apparently you didn't read the last paragraph - LMFAO! His entire explanation is based on a subjective claim that Shazier didn't intentionally "line-up" Bernard with the crown of his helmet....a claim that is shown to be nothing but more NFL gobbledygook by the replay where Shazier clearly INTENTIONALLY DROPS HIS HELMET AT THE LAST MOMENT such that the crown of his helmet is brought to bear as the focal point of impact upon Bernard's head. Laughable how he says it would have been a penalty if Shazier had hit with the crown of his helmet intentionally and lined him up...and then goes on to claim it wasn't intentional despite the video clearly showing it was. Then the NFL further tries to cover their tracks by claiming that they're going to expand the rule in that type of hit implying they are going to make it less interpretive as to intent...LMFAO. Comical that any NFL moron can look at that replay and claim Shazier didn't intentionally drop his head in the last moments such that the crown of his helmet became the focal point of impact - the very DEFINITION of violation Rule 12-2-8. Again, the NFL is their own worst enemy and no surprise that the chickens are coming home to roost regarding unnecessary, illegal, violent, ultra-dangerous hits with absurd explanations like this from NFL liars and "spin-meisters".

 

[Omar81]

Oh, the VIDEO clearly shows you're right and the NFL's VP of officiating is wrong? Now I understand . . . so you're saying he should have WATCHED THE VIDEO before issuing his statement? He probably didn't think of that. And nobody else who disagrees with you thought of it either. We're all blinded by our collective stupidity or our "Stillers" goggles, and all along we should simply have watched the video . . . thanks. I'm sure we'll all now, based on your recommendation and for the first time, actually watch the video. Maybe the VP will also, for the first time, watch the video. Because surely, when we've all invested the time to watch the video, we'll certainly see the light.

If only we all had thought of watching the video in the first place, all of this sturm and drang could have been avoided. Thanks for setting us straight.

Oh, and just for clarity, I am being sarcastic and (to use juvenile abbreviations) LMFAO.

 

[wslee1]

So, Franklin -- you've posted repeatedly in this thread, proposing to "teach" those you deem to be less intelligent than you (which in your mind is everyone). You've said virtually the same thing over and over and over again, in your typical condescending fashion. Funny that the NFL's own VP of Officiating COMPLETELY disagrees with you. I'm sure you'll feel compelled to quote rules and criticize him now, but try to face up to the fact that you are WRONG and those you've been ridiculing are CORRECT.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-not-a-violation/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

Enjoy everyone.

I was waiting for Blandino to give the NFL's official ruling on the play to see what they said. Glad to see the refs and Shazier exonerated by the NFL, other than refs did make a mistake on not giving Steelers the TD. Interesting that Florio and other former officiating guys that came out early defending refs not throwing the flag, all gave the same explanation. More In this other article from NBC Sports:

"The NFL informs players by Wednesday if they’re fined, so if Shazier hasn’t heard yet, that means he’s not getting fined. And that’s because the hit was not a foul.. Hits with the crown of the helmet are only illegal under certain defined circumstances, and Shazier’s hit didn’t qualify as illegal. Brutal, yes. Illegal, no.

In fact, it’s really the Steelers who have a right to complain about the call on that play: Bernard fumbled and Shazier picked up the ball and had a clear path to the end zone for a touchdown, but the officials wrongly blew the play dead."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ys-he-wasnt-fined-for-hit-on-giovani-bernard/

So onto the Bronco's we go. Really going to be tough without Antonio and DeAngelo playing. Need the defense to continue to play well. I hope Shazier can play at the same high level as he did last week, as Broncos are going to try to run right at us. A tough hit on either Payton or Ben could easily knock either out of the game, both are pretty fragile right now. Yikes. So we shall see. I don't like it though.....trying to play without two of our top offensive weapons, and Ben hurt. Me thinks Denver will be all over the short pass, challenging Ben try to prove he can throw deep.

 

[Woodpecker]

refs did make a mistake on not giving Steelers the TD

With the whistles being blown, I don't think they can give the TD. Opposing players stop on the whistle so it's hard to say whether he would have made it or not. If you start giving TDs on plays like that, defenders will keep playing after the whistle and all sorts of anarchy can ensue. I know you think he would have had a TD and I'm not saying he wouldn't, just that allowing action after a whistle is a slippery slope.

 

[wslee1]

With the whistles being blown, I don't think they can give the TD. Opposing players stop on the whistle so it's hard to say whether he would have made it or not. If you start giving TDs on plays like that, defenders will keep playing after the whistle and all sorts of anarchy can ensue. I know you think he would have had a TD and I'm not saying he wouldn't, just that allowing action after a whistle is a slippery slope.

I agree with you, I think the writer was saying the whistle should not have been blown, then therefore it would have played out as a TD. I remember at the time of the play I was trying to hear if indeed the whistle was blown, which it was, ending the play and correctly no TD.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Oh, the VIDEO clearly shows you're right and the NFL's VP of officiating is wrong? Now I understand . . . so you're saying he should have WATCHED THE VIDEO before issuing his statement? He probably didn't think of that. And nobody else who disagrees with you thought of it either. We're all blinded by our collective stupidity or our "Stillers" goggles, and all along we should simply have watched the video . . . thanks. I'm sure we'll all now, based on your recommendation and for the first time, actually watch the video. Maybe the VP will also, for the first time, watch the video. Because surely, when we've all invested the time to watch the video, we'll certainly see the light.

If only we all had thought of watching the video in the first place, all of this sturm and drang could have been avoided. Thanks for setting us straight.

Oh, and just for clarity, I am being sarcastic and (to use juvenile abbreviations) LMFAO.

Again, you missed the final paragraph intended to "cover their tracks" about how they will likely broaden the rule to take the subjectivity and interpretation out of it and just make it plainly illegal to hit with the crown of helmet (which is what the rule currently states, the NFL tools lame claim that this was an unintentional, inadvertant hit with the crown notwithstanding). NFL yet again acting as their own worst enemy with their lying and obfuscation (that hit has always been illegal and the NFL has encouraged it by consistently failing to flag it in favor of "ohhs & awes" from the crowd). Now dipshit NFL lackey spokesman is going to claim this is the first time this has ever happened and they're going to take a look at closing the loop-hole in the rule and make it so it isn't subject to interpretation.....pathetic! And the NFL wonders why they are getting so much bad publicity regarding promoting violent, completely unnecessary, clearly illegal hits for years on years via media venues such as the film "Concussion". The NFL Rules spokesperson's statement is truly pathetic especially the bull$hit that it wasn't illegal Spearing outlawed by Rule12-2-8 and 12-2-6i because it was unintentional and inadvertent....which is laughable bull$hit as anyone who has seen the replay knows (can't get any more "intentional" than the way Shazier INTENTIONALLY dropped his head at the last moment to bring the crown of his helmet to bear as the focal-point of contact of his hit!).

 

[PSUinMICH]

No penalty and no fine equals no rule violation. Get over it!