Shame on the NFL
October 24th 2010 02:09
The above image shows a hit that, admittedly, looks dirty. No one can definitively prove the contrary because hits like this one are so subjective. The NFL, specifically Commissioner Roger Goodell, decided that Steeler linebacker James Harrison violated this subjective code a few times. Check out these plays at full speed and try to discern the warrant for Harrison's $75,000 fine. On a day when hard and questionable hits were rampant, the NFL grossly overreacted to Harrison's licks on Josh Cribbs and Mohammed Massaquoi.
The NFL applies some very subjective criteria in determining whether hits deserve to be penalized. Players are not allowed to lead with their helmet to tackle, aim for the other players' head, hit helmet-to-helmet, cut at the knees, or viciously hit a defenseless player. Let's make a checklist, even a subjective one, of those two hits.
The Cribbs Hit
Did Harrison:
Lead with his helmet into Cribbs? It looks like it
Did he overtly intend to go helmet-to-helmet? No, not overtly
Did he go for Cribbs' knees? Clearly not
Was Cribbs defenseless to the hit? No, he had his head down, low to the ground, and was moving forward
This was the milder of the hits and clearly is no cause for a fine. Now let's break down the second hit.
The Massaquoi Hit
Lead with his helmet on Massaquoi? No, he pulled up and hit with the shoulder pads
Did he overtly go helmet-to-helmet? No, and it looks like he intentionally pulled up to avoid the helmet clash
Did he go for Massaquoi's knees? Not nearly
Was Massaquoi defenseless to the hit? I don't think so. He had caught the pass and turned his body upfield, even though his head hadn't come around yet
While this hit looked vicious and mal-intended, it doesn't look nearly as bad when you slow it down, which is what the NFL does before it hands out fines.
It seems irresponsible to discourage this kind of tackling by handing out such a severe penalty when the offense doesn't even satisfy most of the traits of an illegal hit. Yet, Goodell reacted strongly to Harrison, prompting Harrison to take a leave from the Steelers as he contemplated retirement.
And who can blame him? The message the NFL sent--that players whose livelihood is stopping other players from moving forward by hitting them--is comparable to an accountant being told he can't use a calculator anymore, or a surfer being prohibited from waxing his board. What is Harrison supposed to do with Massaquoi? Stop until he turns his head toward Harrison, gathers himself, says hello, and then tackle him? That's the inference that I draw from the Commissioner's decision. James Harrison took it the same way, apparently, because he nearly quit the game altogether after being disallowed from playing it the only way he knows how.
In my opinion, the only one of Sunday's big hits--Harrison's, Dunta Robinson's, and Brandon Meriweather's--that the NFL's criteria would determine illegal is the one by Meriweather. Interestingly, at full speed, this hit looked the least violent of the three, yet seems the dirtiest when slowed down. Meriweather and Robinson were both fined $50,000, a third of what Harrison was docked. I'd be curious to hear the NFL's justification for doling out the fines the way they did and the severity they considered of each hit.
Yes, the NFL needs to keep a tight rein on violent plays like these. Players, especially ones who aren't looking at the coming hit, need to be protected on the field.
Goodell is on a slippery slope in regulating on-field play
Tell an accountant he can't use a calculator, and what is he going to do? Quit--just like Harrison almost did.
| 49 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Go to Craig Hill's home page by clicking here
