PDA

View Full Version : Can anyonme define "defenseless receiver"?



Ghost
10-18-2010, 04:31 PM
Lot of talk today about the Massaquoi hit/tackle. I even saw it listed as the definition of a defenseless wide receiver?

Maybe I'm incorrect, but to me, what Harrison did - separate a WR from the ball and prevent a first down attempt - was exactly what we were all taught to do dating back to when we started playing in pee wee or junior high.

I really didn't even give it a second thought when I saw it live other than "great play"?

What is a defense supposed to do in any instance a WR is about to catch a ball if hitting them is a penalty?

flippy
10-18-2010, 04:38 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.

flippy
10-18-2010, 04:38 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.

birtikidis
10-18-2010, 04:45 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.
that's what the definition is of a defenseless receiver...
maybe he forgot his firearm?

Tomlinator
10-18-2010, 04:46 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.

I once thought that was the definition as well, but I think it's basically anytime a receiver has to stretch out to catch a ball.

But it seems that when the WR stretches out and hlods on to the ball after getting clobbered, there is no call. If the WR drops it, the flags fly.

SidSmythe
10-18-2010, 05:03 PM
SIDSMYTHE'S DEFINTION;

- a defenseless receiver is any receiver crossing the path of James Harrison whether conscious of his presense or not.

feltdizz
10-18-2010, 05:43 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.

I once thought that was the definition as well, but I think it's basically anytime a receiver has to stretch out to catch a ball.

But it seems that when the WR stretches out and hlods on to the ball after getting clobbered, there is no call. If the WR drops it, the flags fly.
I think it's when a WR stretches out and his body is exposed and it's clear he won't catch the ball.

Captain Lemming
10-18-2010, 06:03 PM
It is a receiver who is not this guy:

http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/dirty-dirty-hines-ward.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1785000/images/_1786102_hines_ward300.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Y-DbBvf7R5Y/THO2nuUGfXI/AAAAAAAAdcA/O9IICD7UpDk/s1600/t1-ward.jpg

Discipline of Steel
10-18-2010, 06:19 PM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.
that's what the definition is of a defenseless receiver...
maybe he forgot his firearm?

"Well maybe he should have armed himself..."
hat tip to Clint Eastwood...

birtikidis
10-19-2010, 12:16 AM
I always thought it referred to a WR that missed an overthrown pass and got hit late when he wasn't expecting it.
that's what the definition is of a defenseless receiver...
maybe he forgot his firearm?

"Well maybe he should have armed himself..."
hat tip to Clint Eastwood...
i was thinking of the scene from Austin Powers after he got done shagging Alotta Fagina... "did you use protections"
"i had my ______" i can't remember what the gun was... lol

Chadman
10-19-2010, 12:24 AM
So wait- a defenseless receiver is anyone that could possibly make a game changing play by stretching out for a tough catch?

Can't hit those guys?

So...that makes the defensive players...defenseless.

Is there a penalty for defensless defenders?

ramblinjim
10-19-2010, 08:09 AM
SIDSMYTHE'S DEFINTION;

- a defenseless receiver is any receiver crossing the path of James Harrison whether conscious of his presense or not.

:Beer

Mister Pittsburgh
10-19-2010, 01:20 PM
Here is Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8 (unnecessary roughness) in the NFL rulebook as it pertains to wide receivers:

h) If a receiver has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself, a defensive player is prohibited from launching (springing forward and upward) into him in a way that causes the defensive player's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm to forcibly strike the receiver's head or neck area -- even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm is lower than the receiver's neck.

Massaquoi didn't catch the ball. End of story. STFU to anyone claiming the hit was dirty.

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
10-19-2010, 02:56 PM
It is such a gray area. But here is the best way to look at it. Remember the term "football move" associated with the catch & fumble debate. That is part of it. If a hit in question occurs before a WR had a chance to execute a "football move"...It more than likely will fall in this gray area. The other part would be anytime a WR's line of sight or action is directed towards the ball or coming of of the process...It would fall into that area. So, the league has protected a WR from the moment he directs his eyes or motion toward a ball in flight until: A. He makes a football move after a catch. B. Falls to the ground. C. Gets his head around to gain awareness of a defender. Just put flags on them already.

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
10-19-2010, 03:06 PM
Here is Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8 (unnecessary roughness) in the NFL rulebook as it pertains to wide receivers:

h) If a receiver has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself, a defensive player is prohibited from launching (springing forward and upward) into him in a way that causes the defensive player's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm to forcibly strike the receiver's head or neck area -- even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet, facemask, shoulder, or forearm is lower than the receiver's neck.

Massaquoi didn't catch the ball. End of story. STFU to anyone claiming the hit was dirty.

(g) Covers that in the notes.

(g) if the initial force of the contact by a defenderís helmet (including facemask), forearm, or shoulder is to the head or neck area of a defenseless player.

Note: Defenseless players in (f) and (g) shall include (i) a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass; (ii) a receiver catching or attempting to catch a pass; (iii) a runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped; (iv) a kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air; and (v) a player on the ground at the end of a play.

Mister Pittsburgh
10-19-2010, 03:31 PM
didn't see that part.

how about this as a fix....get rid of the forward pass.

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
10-19-2010, 04:25 PM
didn't see that part.

how about this as a fix....get rid of the forward pass.

I hear ya. You know, I did hear something that made sense. We hate slowly down the game but if they are saying "Safety First" then maybe consider it. You won't get this out of an NFL official but more often than not they are afraid to make that call incase it changes the game. It happens at such speed, you really need to be in a good position to call it. Allow that penalty to be the one that is reviewable. Not a challange but reviewable. Slow it down for the official and allow him to make the correct call. For the number of times it happens in a game and the game changing outcome...Make sure it is right. Let them correct it and they will be willing to throw the flag even if they weren't sure. Say this is the case. Take the Browns game. Like I said, the hit on Cribbs should not even be an issue. The other, flag gets thrown. Ref reviews and sees it was the correct call...So be it. That should have some type of impact.

papillon
10-19-2010, 04:35 PM
[quote="Mister Pittsburgh":dccxt0ot]didn't see that part.

how about this as a fix....get rid of the forward pass.

I hear ya. You know, I did hear something that made sense. We hate slowly down the game but if they are saying "Safety First" then maybe consider it. You won't get this out of an NFL official but more often than not they are afraid to make that call incase it changes the game. It happens at such speed, you really need to be in a good position to call it. Allow that penalty to be the one that is reviewable. Not a challange but reviewable. Slow it down for the official and allow him to make the correct call. For the number of times it happens in a game and the game changing outcome...Make sure it is right. Let them correct it and they will be willing to throw the flag even if they weren't sure. Say this is the case. Take the Browns game. Like I said, the hit on Cribbs should not even be an issue. The other, flag gets thrown. Ref reviews and sees it was the correct call...So be it. That should have some type of impact.[/quote:dccxt0ot]

Maybe if the NFL re-institutes the rules form the 1970s for cornerback play there would be less big hits. If a cornerback were allowed to bump a receiver until the ball was in the air, cornerbacks and safeties wouldn't be looking for big hits after a catch, they would jostle the receiver as long as possible.

Mel Blount was a physical cornerback and liked to hit, but his opportunities were limited because he preferred to bump the WRs. Donnie Shell was "The Torpedo", but he didn't lay as many licks as today's safeties, because, his opportunities were fewer. Disallow the legal holding and protect the quarterback, let everyone else play football.

Pappy

Mister Pittsburgh
10-19-2010, 05:01 PM
[quote="Mister Pittsburgh":2aexcrcu]didn't see that part.

how about this as a fix....get rid of the forward pass.

I hear ya. You know, I did hear something that made sense. We hate slowly down the game but if they are saying "Safety First" then maybe consider it. You won't get this out of an NFL official but more often than not they are afraid to make that call incase it changes the game. It happens at such speed, you really need to be in a good position to call it. Allow that penalty to be the one that is reviewable. Not a challange but reviewable. Slow it down for the official and allow him to make the correct call. For the number of times it happens in a game and the game changing outcome...Make sure it is right. Let them correct it and they will be willing to throw the flag even if they weren't sure. Say this is the case. Take the Browns game. Like I said, the hit on Cribbs should not even be an issue. The other, flag gets thrown. Ref reviews and sees it was the correct call...So be it. That should have some type of impact.

Maybe if the NFL re-institutes the rules form the 1970s for cornerback play there would be less big hits. If a cornerback were allowed to bump a receiver until the ball was in the air, cornerbacks and safeties wouldn't be looking for big hits after a catch, they would jostle the receiver as long as possible.

Mel Blount was a physical cornerback and liked to hit, but his opportunities were limited because he preferred to bump the WRs. Donnie Shell was "The Torpedo", but he didn't lay as many licks as today's safeties, because, his opportunities were fewer. Disallow the legal holding and protect the quarterback, let everyone else play football.

Pappy[/quote:2aexcrcu]

GREAT POINT PAPPY.

Captain Lemming
10-19-2010, 11:11 PM
[quote="JUST-PLAIN-NASTY":22h0wwfx][quote="Mister Pittsburgh":22h0wwfx]didn't see that part.

how about this as a fix....get rid of the forward pass.

I hear ya. You know, I did hear something that made sense. We hate slowly down the game but if they are saying "Safety First" then maybe consider it. You won't get this out of an NFL official but more often than not they are afraid to make that call incase it changes the game. It happens at such speed, you really need to be in a good position to call it. Allow that penalty to be the one that is reviewable. Not a challange but reviewable. Slow it down for the official and allow him to make the correct call. For the number of times it happens in a game and the game changing outcome...Make sure it is right. Let them correct it and they will be willing to throw the flag even if they weren't sure. Say this is the case. Take the Browns game. Like I said, the hit on Cribbs should not even be an issue. The other, flag gets thrown. Ref reviews and sees it was the correct call...So be it. That should have some type of impact.

Maybe if the NFL re-institutes the rules form the 1970s for cornerback play there would be less big hits. If a cornerback were allowed to bump a receiver until the ball was in the air, cornerbacks and safeties wouldn't be looking for big hits after a catch, they would jostle the receiver as long as possible.

Mel Blount was a physical cornerback and liked to hit, but his opportunities were limited because he preferred to bump the WRs. Donnie Shell was "The Torpedo", but he didn't lay as many licks as today's safeties, because, his opportunities were fewer. Disallow the legal holding and protect the quarterback, let everyone else play football.

Pappy[/quote:22h0wwfx]

GREAT POINT PAPPY.[/quote:22h0wwfx]

If it were accurate.

Blount in 14 games had more post catch big hits that Taylor and SS Shell more than Troy. Easy. One guy in the secondary today produces big hits with regularity and it is Clark. Even he doesnt match Shell for frequency of big hits.

Do you remember what the Raiders did back then? They had truly dirty players. Tatum and Atkinson? They would be in the NEGATIVE no matter the size of their contract, for fines in todays NFL.

I get the theory, but the stuff today isnt even close IMHO.