good luck on the grey areas in the 'hip-drop tackle' rule-change proposal

E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
I love this paragraph from the story at espn,

According to competition committee chairman Rich McKay, the proposed rule was written to address only a subset of the rugby tackling style that has spread around the NFL in recent years. It calls for a 15-yard penalty if a defender grabs the runner with both hands or wraps the runner with both arms and unweights himself by swiveling and dropping his hips and/or lower body, landing on and trapping the runner's leg at or below the knee."

source: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...sed-hip-drop-tackle-rule-change-amid-protests

In trying to make sense of this, I tried to read back from the endquotes to see where this wording begins, which I presume is around "...if a defender...".

Source didn't edit their shit and don't expect an open quote to be resolved, above, by the preceeding sentence in the story.

You're not going to have some serious grey area issues on straight tackles but even on sacks. Not my main point in this bitching but just some more shit to pile on.

Maybe I just felt like bitching. About a lot of things, but this is most recent. Appears like it could be quite difficult in practice. Time will tell.

I don't think I've gotten my few attempts at this site--with the new format--to ever work. Looks promising, this time.

Fucking pointless without something worthwhile to contribute. Give me 13 seconds, or so, to find a worthy recent escape...

Already two years old. Might still be fresh for some of you stoners. Look elsewhere for Kelce's squeeze


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
I need a new computer or it appears this way for all? I see most all crossed out, on my perusal.

5 more months of nothingness, beyond more Sound of Silence from the coming Leafs playoff trip.

I dunno. Enjoy the tune.
 
E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
Looking for someone to change my mind.

Shoulda wasted this 11 min before post, but this didn't help:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

While I am related to Simms' neaighbours, Herb and Jane, I'm not sold. The crucial threshold influence of 'egregious,' mentioned post-7min--can be a head-scratcher.

These same guys will have plenty to say--next season--if and when this rule-change is employed and just how difficult it is to smooth out the edges.

Deontology never works.
Egregious rocks. Perhaps.

Doubling-down as this is three pieces of shit with 1 tune.
Thought I saw two more temptations, though progressive mellowness previously dissuaded.

Need 13 more seconds. Wide-right, motherfuckas.

Correction: Re-Stoned only mellow.
Not my fault.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
MadJack

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
104,444
1,180
113
69
home
Good seeing you, bro.

Yeah, half the first post was lined out?
 
MadJack

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
104,444
1,180
113
69
home
According to competition committee chairman Rich McKay, the proposed rule was written to address only a subset of the rugby tackling style that has spread around the NFL in recent years. It calls for a 15-yard penalty if a defender grabs the runner with both hands or wraps the runner with both arms and unweights himself by swiveling and dropping his hips and/or lower body, landing on and trapping the runner's
Click to expand...
That's how Mark Andrews was injured for most of the season.
 
kickserv

kickserv

Wrong Forum Mod
Forum Member
May 26, 2002
89,263
1,235
113
50
Canada
I have never understood any post EXTRAPOLATER has ever made......but with that said.....nice to see him pop in to Madjacks and say hi:smilies2:smilies1
 
E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
Glad to see some people still alive, here. I've had too much family and friends (and even my only ever pet cat) shirking their responsibility, in this regard. Mighta made me a bit of a bitter, lonely fuck, but I probably had that in my back pocket even before said recent chaos.

I mostly understand the tackles that they are trying to get rid of. I've seen several examples shown, including the on that sidelined Mark Andrews. Several times--every game--players get rocked and I am often surprised when players bounce back up so quickly. Maybe the wording and the interpretation can be smoothed out in practice.

For just one example, are we going to eliminate any chance of a defender chasing down the ball carrier, from behind, as they are heading towards the goal-line? If his speed can catch the ball-carrier, the persuing defender will have to use his own body weight in the process of bringing the man to the ground. The 'unweighting himself' and 'swiveling', in order to do this, seems unavoidable.

'Nuff there.

As far as the crossed-out text. It might have been because of the copy & paste that I did early on in the post--I dunno. It's everything that I added after that that's nixed. Just a guess.

I should leave well-enough alone. Whatever that means.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
Edit, up top, might have helped. 'Source' I didn't fuck with but link still works.

Sorry for any woe-is-whoever BS. Keeping things in perspective is deeper than I can fathom.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
E

EXTRAPOLATER

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
5,646
24
38
Toronto
Alright, maybe this can work.

Two key phrases from today's espn story--

www.espn.com

NFL owners approve ban of swivel hip-drop tackle

NFL owners have approved a rule proposal to ban the swivel hip-drop tackle, the league announced Monday.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

--maybe helped me.

1st, "
If a defender "grabs the runner with both hands or wraps the runner with both arms" and also "unweights himself by swiveling and dropping his hips and/or lower body, landing on and trapping the runner's leg(s) at or below the knee." "

Should I presume that "...landing on and trapping the runner's leg(s) at or below the knee."

...is a pivotal part of such penalty being called?

Later, there's

"...This is only that tackle where the player is lifting themselves in the air and then falling on the legs."

...which might be further clarity, for me, at least.

I'm still not sure about "lifting themselves in the air."
Also, are tacklers now going to try to employ tackling where the ball-carrier falls on top of them as opposed to landing on top of said ball-carrier? Seems to be a big disinction in how such will be called. Similar to recent stressing of such in the roughing the passer calls.

Makes the grey area a little more manageable, but I (we) will still have to watch it in action to see how it pans out.

I'll probably leave it alone, for now (your welcome).


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Bet on MyBookie
Top