Intentional Fouls

In My Humble Opinion
1

It seems to me that the “Win at any cost” mentality now includes the premeditated injury of your opponent if that will produce an advantage or win the game despite any penalty incurred.

Case in point:

The AFC Championship game between the Raiders and Ravens. Just before half time one of the Ravens’ defense men did not just tackle the Raider quarterback, it was clear that he intentionally avoided breaking his own fall upon the QB. Instead, he risked severly injuring the Raiders’ QB by landing with what was obviously an effort to maximize his impact. (He folded his arms just before contact instead of bracing for his landing with palms out.) It would seem that such unsportsmanlike conduct should meet with severe penalties. Instead, the reserve Raider QB was brought in and promptly made a significant error.

I realize, of course, that Hockey puts all of this to shame. I am also aware that football is a contact sport. I just wasn’t aware of when ethics and respect for professionalism were sacrificed upon the alter of success. Actually, I was aware, I’d just rather pretend that it isn’t so. It makes it a lot easier to believe in the inate goodness of mankind. Feel free to mention other sports as well. The recent criminal case for high sticking in the NHL springs to mind.

Any takers on this one?

Was it ethical? Was it sporting? Was it moral? Did it hurt like hell? (Skip that last one.)

2

I’ve noticed that too, that putting someone out of the game to gain and advantage is becoming more common. Unacceptable, I think. It’s tantamount to cheating, and it makes me wonder what kind of people are out there when they’re willing to have another persons career destroyed so they can win one game.
Betrays ALL ideas of good sportsmanship. And without there there’s really NO point.

3

Glad you agree Mnementh, it seems to me to be a violation of all sportsmanlike conduct. Now let’s see if our resident sports editor Snooooopy will give us his dispensation on this nasty little development.

It occurs to me that when a major player like the QB is injured in such an unfair fashion, perhaps both teams should be forced to revert to their backups or second string players for that position. That would equalize the impact upon both teams’ performance. Just a thought.

4

Zenster, I was thinking exactly the same thing, in terms of making the team that knocks out a quarterback with an illegal hit revert to its backup quarterback. I would go one further and mandate that any player who injurs another with a foul be suspended, without pay, until the injured player is able to return.

Football is a contact sport, but these late hits and pile driving after the whistle, especially on the quarterback, has to go.

I would suspend this, however, long enough for someone to kill that nose tackle who let his three hundred and fifty pounds drop on the Raider QB yesterday. That was the most flagrant late hit I’ve seen since Charlie Green slammed Jim McMahan on his shoulder after the whistle, and the moronic refs didn’t even call it!

5

The NFL has already gone to great lengths to make new rules to protect quarterbacks. Defenders are penalized if they take extra steps to slam a quarterback after the ball has been released. The intentional grounding rule has been atrociously watered down – all you have to do is get outside the tackle box (i.e. the spots on the field where the tackle initially lines up) and make sure the ball goes past the line of scrimmage, and you’re home free to throw it away. If there are many more rules in this vein, eventually we’re going to have to have Rich Gannon wear a belt with two tiny flags affixed to the side with Velcro, and he will be considered sacked if someone pulls off both the flags. Are you really interested in eliminating the sack as a part of football?

I don’t think there should be new rules every time someone gets hurt any more than I think people should sue every time someone hurts their feelings. As has been repeated, it is a contact sport. Let’s act like it.

Like it or not, trying to put people out of the game is a time-honored strategy. If reports come out that running back Tyrone Wheatley is coming into a game with a sore right shoulder, every defender is going to try to hammer him there on every carry. You wouldn’t suggest that there be a rule that the defenders had to leave his right shoulder alone, would you?

Keep in mind, there is a significant difference between wanting to put someone out of a game and wanting to end their career.

I don’t know if this would be an issue if a 280-pound defensive end performed the identical manuever on Rich Gannon. I mean, at Tony Siragusa’s weight, ANYTHING he does looks pretty scary. I imagine it looks pretty scary when he kneels to pet a dog ("No, don’t kill Spot, Tony!).

Bringing up the Jim McMahon foul seems a little gratuitous. That, as I recall, involved the defender stalking McMahon several seconds after the ball had been released. Siragusa – and I don’t have the tape in front of me – was in the process of a good ol’ fashioned sack and decided to add an exclamation point. If it was unpleasant to watch, that doesn’t mean it’s illegal, too.

Now, this question is for everyone to answer to yourselves more than it is to convince me of anything: If the quarterback in question were playing for your team’s hated rival, and your team’s defensive tackle was doing the slamming, would you really have any moral objections?

6

Make special rules to protect the QB? Well, that would imply that who you commit the foul against should be the penalty and not the foul itself, it’d kind of be like a hate crime :D. I saw the hit and I thought it was too bad, I would have liked to see both teams at full strength.

[hijack] The reason why there is so much stick work in the NHL is because of movements to ban/reduce fighting. North American Hockey is uses vigilante justice, if people don’t like it, they can get a satellite.[/hijack]

7

Yup, unsportsmanlike conduct is reprehensible regardless of who’s winning.

As I said in the OP, I realize that football is a contact sport, it just seems like a crude approach to things.

8

What I would see to be the hardest thing about making any rules about the subject would be making the calls. From my experience playing soccer, I know that I’ve hated a lot of refs because they either call things too often or don’t call anything. If we have the problem with the refs as it is, then who’s to draw the line between a legal play and an intential foul?

Kitty

9

I would suggest an exclusive video replay judge who could review all angles of a disputed action. A complaint would have to be lodged by a coach, ref or maybe player.

Just an idea. I’d like to see intelligent play win games and not just brute force. I have no desire to bog down the game, merely to see the most capable players achieve just victory.

An excellent comparison was made to the exclusivity of hate crime laws by Dignan. This would have to be applied across the board to work.

10

Yeah, it sucks to get mugged, or get called for tapping someone, but the important thing is consistency. Nothing is worse than having the ref look the other way when you (or a teammate) are blatantly fouled and then calling the same (or lesser) foul against you a minute later. Consistency is sooo important.

Actually, I was being sarcastic. I think that there should be special rules for QB’s and Kickers in football and for goalies in hockey. They’re all important parts to their team, and since those players are in vulnerable positions it’s important to protect them. Yes, a lineman can be just as important, but if a QB is standing back, steps up, and gets nailed well after the ball is gone, then that player should get a stiffer penalty than if he just cut a lineman. QB’s are more of a target, because of their importance.

11

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zenster *
**I would suggest an exclusive video replay judge who could review all angles of a disputed action. A complaint would have to be lodged by a coach, ref or maybe player.
**

Do you mean something different than the current replay system, by which coaches can challenge certain disputed plays (risking a time out if their challenge is not upheld) and the refs can challenge any play they want during the last two minutes of each half?

Out of curiosity, how many football games did you watch this season?

12

Do you mean something different than the current replay system, by which coaches can challenge certain disputed plays (risking a time out if their challenge is not upheld) and the refs can challenge any play they want during the last two minutes of each half?

Out of curiosity, how many football games did you watch this season?

13

What Snooooopy said. (For the record, I’m a Raider fan.)

IMO, had a smaller DL ground Gannon into the turf, a ref might have called it roughing. But the grinding of Gannon was a contiguous part of the pass rush, and the sheer size of Goose allows one to chalk up the injury to Mean Mister Gravity. When a 350-pounder lands on a 215-pounder, things break.

Ejecting the other team’s starting QB won’t work. We’ll just have teams facing a superior QB start a ringer just long enough to flop on the first late hit, taking out the other team’s superior QB without anyone laying a hand on him.

As for a few folks who see Raider complaints as ironic, only one QB-takeout was chalked up to a flag-worthy foul (SD’s Ryan Leaf). One QB-takeout (NO’s Blake) was a freak play; Blake broke his foot when it was trapped beneath a completely clean tackle. The other QB-takeouts were due to wear-and-tear of hits on nearly every play (ex: Cleveland, SF).

14

Looks like Tony Siragusa was fined $10,000 for his hit on Gannon. I can live with that – it’s not such a serious fine that defenders will be afraid to do their jobs, but it does serve to rein them in a little bit. I never said that ANYTHING goes, after all. Just most of it.

15

Snooooopy,

You likely know the rules better than I.

Can the coach challenge ANY call or non-call?

Maybe I haven’t watched enough games with the current replay rules, but I haven’t seen any challenges for events away from the ball.

If there is an off-sides non-call could the coach challenge saying there should have been a call?

My point being, could Gruden have challenged saying that there should have been a roughing or unnecessary roughness call?

16

Well, it seems that the NFL agrees with me. They fined Tony $10,000 for that hit on the Raider’s quarterback.

All of this will be moot seeing as how the bonus for getting into the Superbowl is probably much larger.

Still 10 grand ain’t hay.

17

Coaches are very limited in what they can challenge. They can’t challenge whether or not a penalty was a penalty or not (what coach wouldn’t abuse that up and down the block?). I don’t know the full breadth of the rule, but most challenges deal with possession – whether or not the ball-carrier really fumbled the ball or the ground caused the ball to pop out, or whether or not the receiver had two feet in bounds when catching the ball or just one.

18

When I heard about that $10,000 fine I was hoping maybe they forgot a zero. Shit like that shouldn’t happen. That’s what the XFL is for. It seems to me that one play changed the outcome of the whole season. In this case Siragusa should have been kicked out the game, fined, and suspended. This is why I watch almost exclusively college sports. I prefer sports where the rules of the game are actually enforced.