Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Proposed Rule: Helmet-to-helmet hit = Automatic ejection
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> College Football
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TheGoldenChild


Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 2610
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:51 pm    Post subject: Proposed Rule: Helmet-to-helmet hit = Automatic ejection Reply with quote

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=24070797&nid=294

Quote:
The NCAA has announced that the Football Rules Committee has voted unanimously to start enforcing a stricter penalty for intentional above-the-shoulder hits. It is already a 15-yard penalty and now it would include an automatic ejection.


Quote:
The new rule would include a video replay that would decide whether or not to enforce the ejection, depending on whether or not they deem it was intentional. The ejection would be for the current game if the penalty occurs in the first half. If the penalty happened in the second half or overtime it would carry through to the first half of the next game.


Confused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oregon Ducks


Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Posts: 16849
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woah...
_________________

Oregon RB Tracker
Marshall: 383 rush yds(7.7), 814 rec yds(13.3), 6 TDs
Tyner: 387 rush yds(4.4), 65 rec yds(7.2), 4 TDs
Freeman: 1299 rush yds(5.6), 139 rec yds(9.9), 17 TDs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
ICE13


Joined: 06 Mar 2011
Posts: 3749
Location: PA
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If somebody is spearing (Taylor Mays style, that is) then I absolutely support them getting throw out.

That being said, there have been some hits that would've gotten someone thrown out that I really don't think are necessary for them to get throw out.
_________________
Don't you love James Franklin? I certainly do

"As always, criminal justice proceedings, if any, take precedence over any NCAA actions" - Mark Emmert, 1982
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
malibuspeedrace


Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 14848
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simply terrible.

If they want...Have it reviewed AFTER THE game..And if it is deemed warranted...Then take action....

But I don't trust these bafoons to get an offsides call or holding call correct...now they get the opportunity to boot a player while having a poor angle on the play...

NO THANKS.
_________________
ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
Can't believe I'm saying this, but go OSU.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mgoblue44


Joined: 23 Oct 2008
Posts: 3070
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Intentional above the shoulder hits is key for me. As long as they can prove on replay that a particular hit was intentional, then I have no problem with the rule
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BBando


Joined: 18 Feb 2011
Posts: 7609
Location: Tampa Bay
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lets just play flag football.
_________________
Adopt-A-Buc Mason Foster

garbage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 23247
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have absolutely no problem with the rule. If there were no video replay involved, then yes, there would be a problem. But, in this case, there will have to be confirmation.
_________________


Thx to Uncle Buck!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zelbell


Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 9005
Location: Columbus
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mgoblue44 wrote:
Intentional above the shoulder hits is key for me. As long as they can prove on replay that a particular hit was intentional, then I have no problem with the rule


Pretty much my thinking on this

Don't know how hard it is to tell if something was intentional though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 10256
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mgoblue44 wrote:
Intentional above the shoulder hits is key for me. As long as they can prove on replay that a particular hit was intentional, then I have no problem with the rule

Exactly. I'd even support suspending players multiple games if intent is clear.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 20861
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

While I think the rule is unnecessary, the key will be how it's enforced. I don't agree with the idea of a carryover suspension, and I think the people reviewing the hits will be sensitive to that. I'd find it hard to believe that reviewers will continually suspend every player for a helmet-to-helmet hit, especially when teams are playing in conference title games. It would be a travesty of justice to suspend a guy for the first half of a bowl game because of a questionable hit, especially if he's going to be playing in a BCS game.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.


Last edited by plan9misfit on Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:22 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cp0k2


Joined: 06 Aug 2012
Posts: 5122
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BBando wrote:
Lets just play flag football.

Hooray for just reading the headline and throwing out recycled cliches as an overreaction. Next you'll find some way to blame Roger Goodell and suggest someone should be fired.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RollEagles


Joined: 10 Jan 2012
Posts: 8357
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm actually ok with this. Also wouldn't be upset if it was expanded to other unnecessary roughness penalties.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ark23


Joined: 04 Dec 2012
Posts: 1575
Location: Columbus, Ohio
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

zelbell wrote:
mgoblue44 wrote:
Intentional above the shoulder hits is key for me. As long as they can prove on replay that a particular hit was intentional, then I have no problem with the rule


Pretty much my thinking on this

Don't know how hard it is to tell if something was intentional though

That's my question. I honestly don't think it's all that easy to tell at times. Certainly there are instances where it's clear, but there are going to be plays where it's not clear and wrongly it'll be enforced - and I fear this could swing the balance of some game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DontTazeMeBro


Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 26731
Location: 321
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Freakin stupid. Shouldn't even be a penalty unless its blatant head hunting which barely ever happens anymore.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cp0k2


Joined: 06 Aug 2012
Posts: 5122
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DontTazeMeBro wrote:
Freakin stupid. Shouldn't even be a penalty unless its blatant head hunting which barely ever happens anymore.

Did you even read it? It would be for intentional above the shoulder hits and would need to be verified with replay, not just a bang bang judgement call.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> College Football All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group