Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why was the Palmer Hit a Penalty?

Black

By Black,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Firefox Newbie

Firefox

Posted
Posted

Yeah, why not?

Bottom line here is there is one entity, the NFL, that has legal council in every state they play in ... vs ... a message board poster's opinion.

The rule is "pretty" clear, enough so that the NFL not only found the hit to be in violation, but also that it deserved restitution (the fine).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iampantherman Newbie

iampantherman

Posted
Posted

He lowered his helmet and launched himself. But imo it was a clean hit. Violent but clean. Carson Palmer knocked himself out of the game by holding the ball too long.

I agree. The NFL is in disagreement with itself. The game was built on violence and intense physicality. If it continues changing, it won't be worth watching imo. Hardy was flat out coming after Palmer- trying to get there as quick as he could. There was no intent in his hit. It was as clean as a whistle to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted

Not more violent than your average tackle. It only looked violent because of the size difference and the fact he came at him from behind. He didn't launch into him, he didn't do anything that was unnecessary in the goal of tackling the guy with the ball. He simply ran through him. If you think that was unnecessarily violent, then football might not be the best sport for you to watch. No one in this argument is going to convince anyone else so I'm done pointing out the obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aussiePanther Newbie

aussiePanther

Posted
Posted

Not more violent than your average tackle. It only looked violent because of the size difference and the fact he came at him from behind. He didn't launch into him, he didn't do anything that was unnecessary in the goal of tackling the guy with the ball. He simply ran through him. If you think that was unnecessarily violent, then football might not be the best sport for you to watch. No one in this argument is going to convince anyone else so I'm done pointing out the obvious.

Mate, you've read the rule and still don't see how it's a penalty?

And we can't see the obvious?

Their QB had his ribs cracked and lungs bruised because he was hit to the ribs with a helmet at full speed when the defender could have tackled with shoulder and arms.

The fact that there were other, less "dangerous" or "violent" options that would have had the same result is what brings the flag and the resulting injuries bring the fine.

We all agree that five years ago (hell maybe even just two years ago) it would have been a celebrated hit shown repeatedly on highlight reels, but times and rules have changed.

If you can't see that you should expect to be mystified and pissed off at the refs every single game... well more so than normal. (we all still have to put up with poo like the bogus flag against Keek from the same game)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

Mate, you've read the rule and still don't see how it's a penalty?

And we can't see the obvious?

Their QB had his ribs cracked and lungs bruised because he was hit to the ribs with a helmet at full speed when the defender could have tackled with shoulder and arms.

The fact that there were other, less "dangerous" or "violent" options that would have had the same result is what brings the flag and the resulting injuries bring the fine.

We all agree that five years ago (hell maybe even just two years ago) it would have been a celebrated hit shown repeatedly on highlight reels, but times and rules have changed.

If you can't see that you should expect to be mystified and pissed off at the refs every single game... well more so than normal. (we all still have to put up with poo like the bogus flag against Keek from the same game)

Wassup, James?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
aussiePanther Newbie

aussiePanther

Posted
Posted

Mate, you've read the rule and still don't see how it's a penalty?

And we can't see the obvious?

Their QB had his ribs cracked and lungs bruised because he was hit to the ribs with a helmet at full speed when the defender could have tackled with shoulder and arms.

The fact that there were other, less "dangerous" or "violent" options that would have had the same result is what brings the flag and the resulting injuries bring the fine.

We all agree that five years ago (hell maybe even just two years ago) it would have been a celebrated hit shown repeatedly on highlight reels, but times and rules have changed.

If you can't see that you should expect to be mystified and pissed off at the refs every single game... well more so than normal. (we all still have to put up with poo like the bogus flag against Keek from the same game)

Way to beat a dead horse I know, but I was rewatching this game today and there's one thing I don't _think_ (am I wrong?) was brought up in this argument which would go slightly against my previous points.

It's the point that if Hardy hadn't launched himself and (therefore gone headfirst) I don't think he would have gotten to the QB until AFTER a pass had been gotten off.

So the argument could be made that there were no other "less violent or dangerous options" that would have had the same result.

In the end it's a subjective call that needs to be made by refs in the heat of the moment so it's hard to hold it against them, especially when it's such a massive hit as this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...