You have got to be kidding me

Let it go man.

 

The rule is perfectly clear.

 

Come on...

 

You're missing the point.

 

Both those posted videos differ, in that the players hit the ball carrier. Currently under the rules, ball carrier hits are treated different than defenseless players. I'm not saying the rules are perfect, or that I agree, but ball carriers are not considered defenseless, and punters/kickers and QB's after ints are considered defenseless for the entire play.

I'm not calling Gavin a dirty player or saying it's intentional. The hit is clear as day against the current rules. They'll probably use that tape as referee training material for a hit to the head of a defenseless player.

Ball carriers are unpredictable and could attempt leaping over, lowering their heads, etc, so it's rather difficult to fine a player when there are so many other variables.

 

What point am I missing?

 

Apparently, I am going to have to be very very very clear about this.

How can the NFL justify those types of hits (on Holliday and Bell) in an era where they are trying to promote player safety? I know that those hits in the clips are LEGAL. I am making the bigger point as to WHY??? This is about the spirit of these rules, not a justification of Garvin's hit. The NFL is cherry picking when helmet-to-helmet contact is okay and when it isn't. This is the problem. I have just demonstrated a hit (on bell) that is in every way as bad as Garvin's hit on Huber. I am also trying to show an example of what real helmet-to-helmet contact looks like...a far cry from what Garvin did.

So Garvin is a bad guy for hitting a punter in the chest with a shoulder/helmet combo...but Smith is perfectly all right for literally launching himself, helmet first, arms at his sides, into Bell's helmet? I know darn well that in the eyes of the NFL, that that is the way it is. But it's insane.

 

That is what I was saying earlier in terms of the punter, kicker, QB should have to remove themselves from the play - if you are truly defenseless then get off the field. The way I look at it, once a player goes into any kind of pursuit of the play then all bets are off you open yourself up to being a target. I could understand it if a player seeks out the punter or kicker to light him up, but Garvin clearly did not do that. Huber was trying to make a move towards Brown. I don't like it that he was hurt, but once he ventured into the land of the gladiators it was fair game.

 

Yeah right. That's why there's so much debate and controversy about it.

 

Anyone notice Renegade is not as good as it used to be because they can't light guys up anymore....

 

If the punter is a "defenseless player" throughout the entire play, then he should have to remain motionless after the kick and not be allowed to interfere with or tackle the returner.

 

Exactly. This new brand of Roger Goodell football sucks really bad.