Defenseless Receiver

[hawkeyes]

As a Colts fan I thought the Davis hit on Giovani Bernard was awesome - it was a bang bang hit - nearly perfect under most circumstances, but if it had been one of our receivers I would have been screaming for one of those defenseless receiver flags.

 

The rule says something like this -  A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner.

 

IMO Bernard had not yet completed a catch nor had he become a runner yet - so by definition of the rule it appears to have been a textbook violation which warranted a flag.  He was just as much a defenseless receiver as I have ever seen.

 

If Reggie or TY got lit up like that would you not be screaming for a flag?

[NewEra]

Reggie did get hit like that by the safety in first qt

[pgt_rob]

As a Colts fan I thought the Davis hit on Giovani Bernard was awesome - it was a bang bang hit - nearly perfect under most circumstances, but if it had been one of our receivers I would have been screaming for one of those defenseless receiver flags.

 

The rule says something like this -  A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner.

 

IMO Bernard had not yet completed a catch nor had he become a runner yet - so by definition of the rule it appears to have been a textbook violation which warranted a flag.  He was just as much a defenseless receiver as I have ever seen.

 

If Reggie or TY got lit up like that would you not be screaming for a flag?

 

Reggie got lit up just like Gio earlier and it wasn't called. So I think the refs shouldn't call it if it wasn't called before.

[Pelt]

If Reggie or TY got lit up like that would you not be screaming for a flag?

 

No, because I've never cared for that rule from the get go. The defender should have every right to try and dislodge the ball from the receiver as they're attempting to catch the pass. However, I'm not talking about helmet to helmet contact, or targeting. I'm specifically referring to a good solid hit during the act of catching the ball.

 

I hate seeing a good defensive play get flagged for hitting a defenseless receiver.

[Mr.Debonair]

That was not defenseless receiver. You don't call that there because Vontae used perfect form, didnt hit him at the neck or head area, didn't lead with his head, didn't throw a forearm and hit him after you the ball hit his hands.

If one our Colts got hit like that, I'd be perfectly okay with no flag

[crazycolt1]

It was a good clean hit. End of story.

[keverton]

Its a mans game

[keverton]

Vontae is best db in nfl so far this year no.trashtalk just great player

[pgt_rob]

Vontae is best db in nfl so far this year no.trashtalk just great player

 

He's been preparing for Tom Brady all season.

[Coffeedrinker]

As a Colts fan I thought the Davis hit on Giovani Bernard was awesome - it was a bang bang hit - nearly perfect under most circumstances, but if it had been one of our receivers I would have been screaming for one of those defenseless receiver flags.

 

The rule says something like this -  A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner.

 

IMO Bernard had not yet completed a catch nor had he become a runner yet - so by definition of the rule it appears to have been a textbook violation which warranted a flag.  He was just as much a defenseless receiver as I have ever seen.

 

If Reggie or TY got lit up like that would you not be screaming for a flag?

You have to look at the entire rule.  The defenseless receiver rule is only for hits to the head/neck region or hitting with the top of the crown.

 

“It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are: [. . .]

(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;

[. . .]

(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; and

(2) Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body.”

 

So there was nothing in either Vontae "The Disease" Davis' hit or Adams' hit two plays later.  They were actually text book on what a defensive player is supposed to do.

[jusbadd2]

Never heard Vontae referred to as "The Disease", I like it.

[SteelCityColt]

Also...

 

Was the pass not behind the line of scrimmage? Isn't he a runner by default? 

[Dark_Indy]

Also...

 

Was the pass not behind the line of scrimmage? Isn't he a runner by default? 

 

No, a backwards pass is considered a "runner" versus a "receiver". That was a pass. 

 

I went to the Bengals forums last night and they were all complaining that should have been a foul. The rules say otherwise.

[Stephen]

No, a backwards pass is considered a "runner" versus a "receiver". That was a pass. 

 

I went to the Bengals forums last night and they were all complaining that should have been a foul. The rules say otherwise.

yea i saw that to. That was a great hit.

[wesd2890]

The refs were letting them play.. there was big hits against the colts as well.. im glad the refs let them play football.. tired of a flag every minute, this isnt two hand touch

[lollygagger8]

 

[B~Town]

Also...

 

Was the pass not behind the line of scrimmage? Isn't he a runner by default? 

Smoking gun here behind the LOS there is no such thing as a defenseless receiver .  

[B~Town]

No, a backwards pass is considered a "runner" versus a "receiver". That was a pass. 

 

I went to the Bengals forums last night and they were all complaining that should have been a foul. The rules say

Close but a backwards pass would have been a fumble behind the LOS you can't be a defenseless receiver

[21isSuperman]

I thought the rule was you can't hit a defenseless receiver in the head.  As Coffeedrinker's post says, it's about unnecessary contact or a hit to the head and neck region, neither of which are criteria for the Vontae hit

[lollygagger8]

I thought the rule was you can't hit a defenseless receiver in the head.  As Coffeedrinker's post says, it's about unnecessary contact or a hit to the head and neck region, neither of which are criteria for the Vontae hit

 

Exactly. That was the most perfect form (and legal) tackle I've seen in a long time. 

[Coffeedrinker]

Never heard Vontae referred to as "The Disease", I like it.

I figured VD... disease.

[BOTT]

I think this is why people have a hard time with the new rules.....because they don't actually know what they are.

[hawkeyes]

You have to look at the entire rule.  The defenseless receiver rule is only for hits to the head/neck region or hitting with the top of the crown.

 

“It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are: [. . .]

(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;

[. . .]

(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; and

(2) Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body.”

 

So there was nothing in either Vontae "The Disease" Davis' hit or Adams' hit two plays later.  They were actually text book on what a defensive player is supposed to do.

 

 

OK - so the two primary points of the rule are (a) and (b) both being required to meet the definition of the rule.    a has 8 sub points and b has 2 sub points .... was confused by the way they had the rule laid out - been clearer with some tabs in there.

 

Perfect hit then!

[BuckingColt]

I hate that rule anyway. The brutality of the game is half the reason it is so much fun to watch. If they keep watering it down both basketball and soccer will surpass the NFL in popularity in 20 years.

[ColtsBlueFL]

 

I hate that rule anyway. The brutality of the game is half the reason it is so much fun to watch. If they keep watering it down both basketball and soccer will surpass the NFL in popularity in 20 years.

 

i

 

f they didn't do it, the NFL would be watered down with 3rd stringers starting with all the IR's d players from plays like this-

 

 

A full speed launch into the receiver, or like this below that took out both players-

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2010/10/21/1765545/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell-warns-clubs-about-illegal-hits

 

And another Meriweather hit-

 

 

There were 3 other players that day helped off the field or taken to the hospital.  The NFL began earnest crackdown since that day. They had to before congress or another organization tried.