Has the defenseless player rule been changed?

[Mad Dog]

On the Cardinals only TD drive, I saw TT get flagged for a hit on a defenseless player. I thought the rule simply stated that defenseless players can not be struck forcibly around the head or neck area. TT hit the guy in the midsectionn with his shoulder. There was no leading with the helmet, no blow to the head or neck area. Yet it was flagged as a personal foul.

Will Dissly got submarined as a defenseless player twice yesterday and no call and I'm sure those hits were more dangerous than TT's hit.

So what is the rule these days? I mean if TT doesn't hit him and the guy catches the ball it's an easy TD.

Maybe they need to start penalizing QB's for throwing up murder balls since TT was just going to where the ball was going. He had little choice but to hit the guy and made sure he hit him in the target zone and only with his shoulder.

 

[JPatera76]

I thin that was even when the announcers were like .. back in my day we called that football.. and also disagreed with the call.

 

[scutterhawk]

It was a good Defensive play by TT, It wasn't a ticky tacky play, it was a ticky tacky call...It's what the announcer called "Playing Football"

 

[AgentDib]

I agree it was a bad call. The league's opinion of this will come shortly when you see whether Thompson gets fined or not.

The receiver was defenseless according to 9.a.3. below.

ARTICLE 9. PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE
a. Players in a defenseless posture are:
3. A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner.

Penalties regarding defenseless players:

1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;
2. lowering the head and making forcible contact with any part of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body; or
3. illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body.

Thompson did launch, his helmet did make (incidental) contact, and the defender was hit in the shoulder. So the Ref either felt that the hit was too high (neck area) or that Thompson's helmet contact was too much (forcible contact). Neither seemed like the case in slow motion replay but this is a real time call without the benefit of replay, zoom and slow motion. I can't really fault the ref but this is another reason why the sky referee is inevitable.

 

[Chrome_Seahawk]

I'm with AgentDib here - I also don't think that it helped that the ball was overthrown - the Ref probably thought it looked worse because the Cardinals player was stretched out so much and it still was over his reach.

Of course TT doesn't have the time to try and calculate if a ball is going to be overthrown ......so I don't fault him for trying to make a play.

 

[sutz]

It can be pretty subjective. It certainly was not the worst call I've seen, but the hit was marginally wrong.

Also, like was said above, I don't think the ref had a great look or angle at it.

Sometimes they get them wrong. At least that one wasn't a game changer. unno:

 

[Mad Dog]

Of course it reminds of Kam's hit on Vernon Davis where 3 flags went out but Kam never got fined as he hit Davis in the chest with his shoulder.

I think just flagging because I hit seems "violent" is ridiculous and they need to add this to the replayable fouls. Anything that can be a spot foul or 15 yarder should be reviewable.

 

[chris98251]

The receivers feet were not on the ground to make a football move when TT hit him so he could not make a move to defend himself is what it really comes down to.

In years past that was a clean hit to dislodge a possible catch.

 

[AgentDib]

Pete cleared it up in his press conference today. It looked so fast on the field that the Refs thought it was helmet to helmet which would violate 9.A.1 above. Like with the previous hit this season Pete said that if Thompson had hit with the opposite (left) shoulder it would have kept his head out of the way and then he wouldn't have been flagged based on how it looked in real-time.

 

[Mad Dog]

Pete cleared it up in his press conference today. It looked so fast on the field that the Refs thought it was helmet to helmet which would violate 9.A.1 above. Like with the previous hit this season Pete said that if Thompson had hit with the opposite (left) shoulder it would have kept his head out of the way and then he wouldn't have been flagged based on how it looked in real-time.

Probably asking as much of a player to get the proper shoulder involved as it is to expect refs to see it correctly. Bang bang plays should be provided some leeway. But it’s assumed guilty every time a player gets hit hard.