Is there no spearing rule in the NFL?

Yes, and this was a penalty regardless of what Periera is trying to spin to the public.

Yes, and this was a penalty regardless of what Periera is trying to spin to the public.

Took longer than I thought, but there it is.

Took longer than I thought, but there it is.

 

What took longer? Either hitting a player with the crown of your helmet is a penalty or it isn't?

 

It's in the rule book... There is no gray area about being a runner or anything.

 

I'll add this... Had it been Harrison making the hit, it probably would've been called too.

Former NFL head of officials Mike Pereira says the Shazier hit was probably not a penalty as some/many think. He says he doesn't think it meets the reason the rule was put in. Says the Competition Committee may end up changing it in the near future.

 

Do you have a link?

 

The reason I ask is that with the amount of rules and convoluted way they are written, I see officials struggle to apply them each week. I can't imagine any analysis of rulemakers' original intent goes on although I would be interested if there is any reason for the rule outside of a newfound interest in player safety.

 

I know you aren't arguing anything and just putting out information, but I think it is a much easier sell that the refs simply missed the call, rather than that it wasn't a personal foul by the rulebook.

 

The link below discusses Pereira's tweet, but has an rebuttal update at the bottom. Either Gio was not a runner and was a defenseless receiver or he was a runner and Shazier initiated contact with the crown of his helmet.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25444243/this-is-why-ryan-shazier-wasnt-flagged-for-head-shot-to-gio-bernard

Edited January 11, 201610 yr by Bipsic
It always helps to add a link when your post references one

What took longer? Either hitting a player with the crown of your helmet is a penalty or it isn't?

 

It's in the rule book... There is no gray area about being a runner or anything.

 

I'll add this... Had it been Harrison making the hit, it probably would've been called too.

 

...Or Joey Porter:walk:

 

The link below discusses Pereira's tweet, but has an rebuttal update at the bottom. Either Gio was not a runner and was a defenseless receiver or he was a runner and Shazier initiated contact with the crown of his helmet.

 

Thank you... And either way, IT IS A PENALTY...

What took longer? Either hitting a player with the crown of your helmet is a penalty or it isn't?

 

It's in the rule book... There is no gray area about being a runner or anything.

 

I'll add this... Had it been Harrison making the hit, it probably would've been called too.

I've read the rule. I can post it here if you'd like. I can also show you what the NFL has posted when the update in 2013 to the rule (video) for an example and it doesn't look much different. Lots of room for interpretation on head placement. Was the tackler trying to get his head in front and his target not the center of the runner? I know many on here think it was a penalty. Your allegiance demands it. However, several officials like the one on the broadcast and no Periera have said it's not, but what do they know anyway?

I've read the rule. I can post it here if you'd like. I can also show you what the NFL has posted when the update in 2013 to the rule was posted for an example and it doesn't look much different. Lots of room for interpretation on head placement. Was the tackler trying to get his head in front and his target not the center of the runner? I know many on here think it was a penalty. Your allegiance demands it. However, several officials like the one on the broadcast and no Periera have said it's not, but what do they know anyway?

 

And you just proved my point... Lol!

 

The "interpretation" of the official is always going to side against guys like Burfict, Harrison and Porter...

 

And that's crap, either it's a penalty on everyone or it isn't...

 

Thanks for helping prove my point though.

If Mike Pereira never criticized officials' calls then some of you would have a valid point.

 

That's not the case. You have someone who was the head of the officials saying the intent of the rule and how to apply it isn't crystal clear. That's a problem in and of itself. You have another former official saying he would have flagged it. Two high-level NFL guys seeing it differently.

And you just proved my point... Lol!

 

The "interpretation" of the official is always going to side against guys like Burfict, Harrison and Porter...

 

And that's crap, either it's a penalty on everyone or it isn't...

 

Thanks for helping prove my point though.

Your logic is astounding.

If Mike Pereira never criticized officials' calls then some of you would have a valid point.

 

That's not the case. You have someone who was the head of the officials saying the intent of the rule and how to apply it isn't crystal clear. That's a problem in and of itself. You have another former official saying he would have flagged it. Two high-level NFL guys seeing it differently.

 

There lies the problem... It's a penalty or it isn't...

I think the Burfict hit was a penalty and the Shazier hit was a penalty...

 

The Williams hit clearly was not a penalty in anybody's eyes and he was flagged...

 

I've seen shows on ESPN all day breaking down Burfict hits and penalties over the years... No one is in agreement on any of these shows as to what was clean and what wasn't...

 

Time to simplify the rules, take out interpretation... Even if you "accidentally" hit a guy illegally it's a penalty... Period.

 

Or, get back to real football... Ronnie Lott and Rod Woodsen wouldn't be hall of famers in today's NFL... It's weak.

Your logic is astounding.

 

You have yet to disprove it... You're admitting it's "interpretation".. And all I'm saying is that is the problem with the NFL.. Period. Take Burfict and Shazier out of the equation altogether... Fine with me.

 

Football is almost unwatchable anymore with all the penalties and such.

As you said, several former officials and players think Shazier's hit wasn't a penalty, but just as many former officials and players disagree.

 

If that's the case, and it is... How do they expect fans to "understand" when it's a penalty and when it isn't one.

Sorry if you can't follow my logic... I'm sure most on here, even if they disagree, can understand clearly where I'm coming from.

You have yet to disprove it... You're admitting it's "interpretation".. And all I'm saying is that is the problem with the NFL.. Period. Take Burfict and Shazier out of the equation altogether... Fine with me.

 

Football is almost unwatchable anymore with all the penalties and such.

As you said, several former officials and players think Shazier's hit wasn't a penalty, but just as many former officials and players disagree.

 

If that's the case, and it is... How do they expect fans to "understand" when it's a penalty and when it isn't one.

Sorry if you can't follow my logic... I'm sure most on here, even if they disagree, can understand clearly where I'm coming from.

 

You keep saying it's clearly a penalty. I listed two guys in the business of making those determinations that cannot agree. So it would see your view that it was definitely a penalty doesn't have clear support.

You keep saying it's clearly a penalty. I listed two guys in the business of making those determinations that cannot agree. So it would see your view that it was definitely a penalty doesn't have clear support.

 

Wrong Clyde, maybe I'm being unclear.. So let me clarify.

 

I'm saying in "my opinion" and many other former players and officials' opinion it is a penalty. And that's a problem, it shouldn't be open for interpretation.. Use instant replay and get it right...

 

Let me ask you, was Williams' hit earlier in the game a penalty? It was flagged, but was it the right call?

 

No one I've seen or read have said it was the right call.

 

I'm just saying, simplify the rule and get it right.. No more, no less.

 

So, yeah, in my mind... It was a penalty... But as you pointed out, many agree with me and many disagree... NFL can and should clear this kind of stuff up.

Former NFL head of officials Mike Pereira says the Shazier hit was probably not a penalty as some/many think. He says he doesn't think it meets the reason the rule was put in. Says the Competition Committee may end up changing it in the near future.

 

Taken from the an article about the video the NFL released when the rule was changed

“The first rule change prohibits a runner or tackler from initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet outside the tackle box,” the video’s narrator says. “There are three components to this foul: First, the player must line up his opponent. Shazier did Second, he must lower his head. Shazier did And third, he must deliver a forcible blow with the crown of his helmet to any part of his opponent’s body. Shazier did, to Gio's head The crown is the very top of the helmet. This rule was designed not only to protect the player receiving the blow, but also the player delivering it. Violations of this rule will result in 15-yard penalties for unnecessary roughness, and potential discipline. If the contact occurs in the tackle box, or if all three components are not present, there is no foul. All three were present and it was outside the tackle box”

 

Pereira said that the penalty on PacMan was NOT for hitting Porter. He says the league says it was for contact with the official.

 

That's fine. Pacman deserved the penalty. But the issue many have is Porter being out there were he was. Did Pereira comment on that and why there was no flag?