Bernard Pollard Thinks Tennessee Was Robbed, or the Fix Was in, or... Something....

[Joel]

http://espn.go.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/3138/titans-frustrated-with-calls-from-higher-power

I agree the shoulder-to-shoulder hit was clean, but then again he SHOULD have been flagged for removing his helmet on the field later, and took a lot of cheap shots all day; I agree with one BF posters assertion he should've been ejected the way he played Sunday. Remember, this guy's the reason the Brady Rule exists; they could've called it the Pollard Rule just as easily.

On one play a DB (probably Verner, since he usually had the coverage, but I don't recall for sure) grabbed onto Decker for bump and run "at the line" and rode him downfield ten yards or more without EVER releasing, yet the refs let it go. I figured they just felt sorry for Tennessee, having already flagged them for yet another PI a few plays earlier. I've beaten the "be consistent" drum myself this year, but tend agree with the former Oilers beat writer: This is an average-to-poor team that NEEDS to hold against Decker plus two Pro Bowlers, and is making excuses for 8 losses.

Sorry, guys, but the refs didn't give up 51 pts yesterday, and if they just swooned at the sight of PFM he'd have >1 Ring (and Flacco <1.) I'm not aware of any Manning Rule after a hit took HIM out for a year, even though it resulted in FOUR spinal surgeries; last time we played SD even the Brady Rule was ignored.

[Simple Jaded]

Pollard is full of shit, the Broncos get ****** more often than not. From little things like forward progress to uncalled PI and defenseless receiver penalties, Pollard can suck a wet fart if he thinks the Broncos have been getting preferential treatment in this or any game this season.

Naturally there will be the "OMG, tin foil hat" nonsense, whatever.

[Simple Jaded]

Oh, and btw, how many seasons has Pollard ended, exactly? Not that I'm complaining cause it's usually a Patriot. Their DC is the DB behind Bountygate. Quit your ******* bitching.

[Broncolingus]

Bernard Pollard Thinks Tennessee Was Robbed, or the Fix Was in, or... Something....



3874

[Dapper Dan]

I've only seen the first half, so far. He seemed pissed the whole time about something. Maybe if his head was in the game, they would have done better.

[Joel]

Oh, and btw, how many seasons has Pollard ended, exactly? Not that I'm complaining cause it's usually a Patriot. Their DC is the DB behind Bountygate. Quit your ******* bitching.
I forgot about Williams being with Tennessee; perhaps it's more disturbing that he STARTED there and has simply "come home" like McDumbass after his Spygate sequel. Throw in Pollard and we've basically got a mugger complaining the authorities unfairly persecute him for beating people up and robbing them, that THEIR viciousness offends him.

Here's a thought: Why not play the game well enough to beat opponents without LITERALLY beating them?

[OrangeHoof]

Pollard is a "knockout game" in cleats. If he's on your team, you love his toughness and big hits but you hate all the penalties he draws. If he's on the opposition, he's just a thug that likes to knock players out of the game. He could get away with being nasty when he was a Raven (speaking of teams the refs go easy on) but his act gets flagged when he's a Chief, Texan, Titan, etc.

[Traveler]

Hate to admit it, but the Pollard hit on Decker was legit. Bad call by the refs, but I'll take it. :whoo:

[LTC Pain]

The Broncos got two TD passes overturned and Pollard whines about the Titans getting the shaft??? Screw Pollard and the horse he rode in on!!!

[claymore]

Hate to admit it, but the Pollard hit on Decker was legit. Bad call by the refs, but I'll take it. :whoo:

As much as our WR'get held or interfered with, I will take the ticky tack call. Decker seems to be playing with more of a toughness too. I saw him stop himself from doing his patented "Wheres the Flag" dance after an incomplete pass.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

http://espn.go.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/3138/titans-frustrated-with-calls-from-higher-power

I agree the shoulder-to-shoulder hit was clean, but then again he SHOULD have been flagged for removing his helmet on the field later, and took a lot of cheap shots tall day; I agree with one BF posters assertion he should've been ejected the way he played Sunday. Remember, this guy's the reason the Brady Rule exists; they could've called it the Pollard Rule just as easily.

On one play a DB (probably Verner, since he usually had the coverage, but I don't recall for sure) grabbed onto Decker for bump and run "at the line" and rode him downfield ten yards or more without EVER releasing, yet the refs let it go. I figured they just felt sorry for Tennessee, having already flagged them for yet another PI a few plays earlier. I've beaten the "be consistent" drum myself this year, but tend agree with the former Oilers beat writer: This is an average-to-poor team that NEEDS to hold against Decker plus two Pro Bowlers, and is making excuses for 8 losses.

Sorry, guys, but the refs didn't give up 51 pts yesterday, and if they just swooned at the sight of PFM he'd have >1 Ring (and Flacco <1.) I'm not aware of any Manning Rule after a hit took HIM out for a year, even though it resulted in FOUR spinal surgeries; last time we played SD even the Brady Rule was ignored.

:Cry::Cry::Cry::Cry::Cry:

[Hawgdriver]

Pollard has a reason to be frustrated for that hit, but they have Gregg Williams stink on them, and Pollard has a bad reputation. He's right, when you get down to it: the league has changed, and players like him will be the dinosaurs.

[chazoe60]

The Pollard hit shouldn't have been flagged but there was a Defensive Holding call on the same play so the difference was really just 10 yards, hardly enough to explain the point differential.

[CrazyHorse]

Hate to admit it, but the Pollard hit on Decker was legit. Bad call by the refs, but I'll take it. :whoo:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dd6iS4pfQ5I/UqT7x90N8oI/AAAAAAAA9nM/TLiMXp7q43o/s1600/ouch.gif
I disagree. Even though Pollard lead with his shoulder, he still hit Decker near the neck/head area. That's the type of hit that can end a career. Based on my understanding of the rulebook it qualifies as a penalty.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/27/nfl-attempts-to-clarify-the-defenseless-player-rules/

[Dreadnought]

Pollard has a reason to be frustrated for that hit, but they have Gregg Williams stink on them, and Pollard has a bad reputation. He's right, when you get down to it: the league has changed, and players like him will be the dinosaurs.

Pollard has earned his bad rep, too, and shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt. Ref's ought to be watching that goon. The hit was close enough to defenseless receiver, or headhunting, or whatever. Anyways, he ought to be flagged just for being a doosh.

By the way, it wasn't that freakin close of a game. You didn't get "robbed." The Broncos are better than the Titans, period, full stop.

[BigDaddyBronco]

Wasn't Decker a defenseless reciever in that play? They can give a 15 yarder if the guy is hit where he can't protect himself if I remember correctly.

[Hawgdriver]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dd6iS4pfQ5I/UqT7x90N8oI/AAAAAAAA9nM/TLiMXp7q43o/s1600/ouch.gif
I disagree. Even though Pollard lead with his shoulder, he still hit Decker near the neck/head area. That's the type of hit that can end a career. Based on my understanding of the rulebook it qualifies as a penalty.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/27/nfl-attempts-to-clarify-the-defenseless-player-rules/

Looks like the lat/shoulder area to me. I have no problem with the call--no problem defending the longevity of skill positions because that's why I watch the game--but it's a bit too lateral to call head/neck in my book.

[Hawgdriver]

And Pollard was clearly "headhunting" even if heads didn't collide. Just the whole violence and mean intentions, you can see it, and that's probably what drew the penalty.

[Hawgdriver]

There are probably wicked car crashes that are safer than that hit.

[Ravage!!!]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dd6iS4pfQ5I/UqT7x90N8oI/AAAAAAAA9nM/TLiMXp7q43o/s1600/ouch.gif
I disagree. Even though Pollard lead with his shoulder, he still hit Decker near the neck/head area. That's the type of hit that can end a career. Based on my understanding of the rulebook it qualifies as a penalty.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/27/nfl-attempts-to-clarify-the-defenseless-player-rules/


Pollard did EXACTLY what the NFL wants you to do on that play, and lead with the shoulder and hit Decker in the shoulder. The call was bad,a nd Pollard got ripped on it, and can see why he would be upset with the call. BUT, move on. Bad calls happen and they are erroring left and right on the "safe" side because Refs get ripped of missing calls like this.

[Ravage!!!]

And Pollard was clearly "headhunting" even if heads didn't collide. Just the whole violence and mean intentions, you can see it, and that's probably what drew the penalty.

Its football. Its a violent sport. PLEASE dont take away the hard hitting in football because it looks violent. That is what we WANT from this game!

[Hawgdriver]

Its football. Its a violent sport. PLEASE dont take away the hard hitting in football because it looks violent. That is what we WANT from this game!

Take it up with the NFL lol.

[Dreadnought]

Its football. Its a violent sport. PLEASE dont take away the hard hitting in football because it looks violent. That is what we WANT from this game!

Not at the cost of more Darryl Stingleys or Junior Seau's, Rav. Not for me. I love this game, its the ultimate chess match, but we aren't ******* savages, and this ain't ancient Rome. Gladiator fights were probably pretty exciting too, but I don't want to watch guys get maimed for my amusement

[OrangeHoof]

I'll also defend Pollard on the play. It was clean to me but, as I say constantly, the refs call *results* not the rules. Decker flopped around like a fish after the hit so, therefore, it had to be a penalty* (*- except when done by a Steeler). That's the reality. If Decker bounces up like it was no big thing, I'd guess there would have been no flag.

I think Decker has some Ed McCaffery in him. The dude just attracts hard hits.

[Northman]

Wasn't Decker a defenseless reciever in that play? They can give a 15 yarder if the guy is hit where he can't protect himself if I remember correctly.

Yea, while i think the hit itself was legit i think the reasoning was because Deck was in the air and had no way to protect himself. Ive seen this called on a lot of players when they are jumping up for the ball, etc. Its been a while but i think John Lynch got called for something like this on Dante Hall although you can see John using the crown of his helmet on Dantes chin. But i think back then they were just simply calling it a defenseless receiver.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoZEczoSL6M

[AllThings18]

Pollard must be talking about the Patriots/Browns game. If not he's simply a mental midget.

[broncosinindy]

There were alotnof missed calls both ways. I don't subscribe to whining about penalties. The hands to the face on manning.. late hits. The decker touchdown was indeed a touchdown. Suck it up pollard

[Dapper Dan]

Pollard looked pissed off the whole game, especially at Decker. I'm sure the intent was probably there.

[topscribe]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dd6iS4pfQ5I/UqT7x90N8oI/AAAAAAAA9nM/TLiMXp7q43o/s1600/ouch.gif
I disagree. Even though Pollard lead with his shoulder, he still hit Decker near the neck/head area. That's the type of hit that can end a career. Based on my understanding of the rulebook it qualifies as a penalty.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/27/nfl-attempts-to-clarify-the-defenseless-player-rules/
I really can't agree with that. It was shoulder to shoulder, and I would have
been upset had it been a Bronco who was called for that. It's getting to
where the defender can't hit an offensive player anywhere.

The NFL isn't making it any better. If anything, they're making it worse. Just
ask Gronkowski.

I'm not defending Pollard. The guy's a punk, and it's his reputation that got
him called for that hit, IMO. But the eyeball test says it was a botched call.
.

[LawDog]

I really can't agree with that. It was shoulder to shoulder, and I would have
been upset had it been a Bronco who was called for that. It's getting to
where the defender can't hit an offensive player anywhere.

The NFL isn't making it any better. If anything, they're making it worse. Just
ask Gronkowski.

I'm not defending Pollard. The guy's a punk, and it's his reputation that got
him called for that hit, IMO. But the eyeball test says it was a botched call.
.

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.

Note: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on an opponent.

Penalty: For unnecessary roughness: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is judged by the official(s) to be flagrant.

http://nflcommunications.com/2011/12/27/definition-of-a-defenseless-player/

Decker does appear to meet the definition of defenseless, however, I don't see where Pollard makes contact with Decker's head or neck area, nor does he lead with the crown of the helmet. Based on the language of the rule, this should not have been called a penalty. Watching that gif though, there is already a flag on the turf when Pollard makes his hit - I didn't see the game live so I am curious what that flag was for? Def holding prior to the pass? Anyone have any idea?

[BroncoWave]

At full speed there was zero way to tell for sure if it was a legal hit or not. We all thought it was a dirty hit at full speed. When it's borderline, the ref is gonna make that call every time. It's easy to say they were wrong when we can look at slow-mo replays.

Now by that same token, it's kinda ridiculous that you can't review that. The replay clearly showed it was a good hit. Why isn't that reviewable?

[Dapper Dan]

At full speed there was zero way to tell for sure if it was a legal hit or not. We all thought it was a dirty hit at full speed. When it's borderline, the ref is gonna make that call every time. It's easy to say they were wrong when we can look at slow-mo replays.

Now by that same token, it's kinda ridiculous that you can't review that. The replay clearly showed it was a good hit. Why isn't that reviewable?

Because that would take more time. Less people would watch. Less money for the NFL.

Lol. Player $afety.

[BroncoWave]

Because that would take more time. Less people would watch. Less money for the NFL.

Lol. Player $afety.

You could have someone in the league office that reviews those types of plays. It would take just a few seconds to overturn and radio it in to the refs.

[Dapper Dan]

You could have someone in the league office that reviews those types of plays. It would take just a few seconds to overturn and radio it in to the refs.

A few seconds can matter. That's why some defenders fake an injury against a hurry up offense, for a few seconds.

I still agree. I would be content with reviewing those hits. It's becoming extremely difficult to play defense and it's changing the outcome of games.

[AllThings18]

At full speed there was zero way to tell for sure if it was a legal hit or not. We all thought it was a dirty hit at full speed. When it's borderline, the ref is gonna make that call every time. It's easy to say they were wrong when we can look at slow-mo replays.

Now by that same token, it's kinda ridiculous that you can't review that. The replay clearly showed it was a good hit. Why isn't that reviewable?

To me it could be a lot like the targeting rule. From my understanding, they flag the play, then review it. The flag stays in place(I believe), but they can remove the automatic ejection if the defender didn't lead with the helmet.

Personally, I like how the NCAA reviews every play and buzzes down if they need to look at something. Now if Coke or Pepsi would come in and sponsor every review, then the NFL would be all for more reviews whether the viewer or fan liked it or not.

They are always going to error on the side of caution, but even then they miss some obvious penalties.

[Canmore]

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.

Note: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on an opponent.

Penalty: For unnecessary roughness: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is judged by the official(s) to be flagrant.

http://nflcommunications.com/2011/12/27/definition-of-a-defenseless-player/

Decker does appear to meet the definition of defenseless, however, I don't see where Pollard makes contact with Decker's head or neck area, nor does he lead with the crown of the helmet. Based on the language of the rule, this should not have been called a penalty. Watching that gif though, there is already a flag on the turf when Pollard makes his hit - I didn't see the game live so I am curious what that flag was for? Def holding prior to the pass? Anyone have any idea?

Could have sworn that there was defensive holding that was declined because of the personal foul.

[AllThings18]

Could have sworn that there was defensive holding that was declined because of the personal foul.

That is correct

1-10-DEN 43 (12:33) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 18-P.Manning pass incomplete deep left to 87-E.Decker (31-B.Pollard).
Penalty on TEN-20-A.Verner, Defensive Holding, declined.
PENALTY on TEN-31-B.Pollard, Personal Foul, 15 yards, enforced at DEN 43 - No Play.
1st Down Penalty: DEN Pass Incomplete (Nullified): DEN 18 (P.Manning) Pass Target (Nullified): DEN 87 (E.Decker) Pass Defensed
(Nullified): TEN 31 (B.Pollard) Pass Length, No Completion (Nullified): DEN 18 (P.Manning), 32 yards Penalty: TEN 31 (B.Pollard), 15
yards

[AllThings18]

http://nflcommunications.com/2011/12/27/definition-of-a-defenseless-player/

Decker does appear to meet the definition of defenseless, however, I don't see where Pollard makes contact with Decker's head or neck area, nor does he lead with the crown of the helmet. Based on the language of the rule, this should not have been called a penalty. Watching that gif though, there is already a flag on the turf when Pollard makes his hit - I didn't see the game live so I am curious what that flag was for? Def holding prior to the pass? Anyone have any idea?

The link you quoted was from 2011. They have altered the rule slightly since then.



(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, even
if the initial contact of the defender’s helmet or facemask is lower than the passer’s neck, and regardless of
whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;
or
(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; or
(3) Illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to
contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet (including the
top/crown and forehead/‖hairline‖ parts) to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. Note:
This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player,
as defined in Article 7 above.

Note1: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.

Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact.



They are going to attempt to protect these guys. In hindsight it's easy to say Pollard's rep had something to do with it, but I'm not sure how aware the refs are of what player/# is doing it. I think they simply react to what they see. That will likely draw a flag 95+ times out of 100.

[Ravage!!!]

Pollard was already pissed at Decker for the talk, and for the personal foul for mouthing after the TD (that only results in a kickoff that is closer for a kicker that already kicks it out of the endzone)

[Ravage!!!]

Not at the cost of more Darryl Stingleys or Junior Seau's, Rav. Not for me. I love this game, its the ultimate chess match, but we aren't ******* savages, and this ain't ancient Rome. Gladiator fights were probably pretty exciting too, but I don't want to watch guys get maimed for my amusement

Oh... I guess I'm confused. I thought the players knew what they were getting into when signing their big dollar contracts to play a sport.

[Dapper Dan]

Oh... I guess I'm confused. I thought the players knew what they were getting into when signing their big dollar contracts to play a sport.

The rules lead to more offense. Which is what I think the NFL wants. It's going to start happening in all sports, I think. I can see the NFL making the field smaller, so people are at full speed less often (for player safety, not to add to scoring, of course).

[Joel]

Hate to admit it, but the Pollard hit on Decker was legit. Bad call by the refs, but I'll take it. :whoo:
I agree that was a bad call, but since he didn't get flagged for taking his helmet off on the field or concussing Welker, you bet I'll take it. THAT call was bad; Pollard had so many dirty hits on OTHER plays Sunday he should've been ejected.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dd6iS4pfQ5I/UqT7x90N8oI/AAAAAAAA9nM/TLiMXp7q43o/s1600/ouch.gif
I disagree. Even though Pollard lead with his shoulder, he still hit Decker near the neck/head area. That's the type of hit that can end a career. Based on my understanding of the rulebook it qualifies as a penalty.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/27/nfl-attempts-to-clarify-the-defenseless-player-rules/
Head or neck, NOT shoulder, which is where Pollard hit Decker. If it were JUST that call, Pollard would have a point, but Welker didn't get his concussion from a hit in the shoulder. Pollard and Griffin just grabbed the ONE bad call on the former out of a half dozen good ones (and as many more that SHOULD'VE been made but weren't) to say they're all bad. Some cop somewhere some time framed a guy for murder, so all convicted murderers are innocent. Yeah... no....


And Pollard was clearly "headhunting" even if heads didn't collide. Just the whole violence and mean intentions, you can see it, and that's probably what drew the penalty.
I still wish the NFL flagged intent (difficult as it is to judge) rather than contact to/from specific areas. It misses the point to regulate HOW defenders can try to INTENTIONALLY injure opponents. That's all the "you can't hit them HERE, but can hit them THERE" rules do; pass a rule like than and dirty players will just find new legal ways to do the same old career/life-threatening crap.

My go-to example here is James Harrison telling commentators before our playoff game with Pitt that, since he couldn't go high anymore, he'd just go low—even knowing that's far more likely to cause injury. Cut to a long pass to Decker in the second quarter: Harrison slams into his knee, Deckers season is done and it's all perfectly legal. :)


Pollard looked pissed off the whole game, especially at Decker. I'm sure the intent was probably there.
Bingo, and THAT'S what we need to purge to avoid the NFL becoming/remaining a modern gladiators arena. Put in those terms, one could argue Pollard's just steamed because he found a way to headhunt guys within the rules but STILL got flagged, and in that sense, yes, the rules are bad: Because they should prohibit all such behavior regardless of METHOD. Imagine this:

"To preserve public safety, it is now illegal to shoot someone in the head."

"Can I still shoot people in the chest? Or stab them in the head?"

"What was unclear about 'It is now illegal to SHOOT someone in the HEAD'?"

Finally, the updated rule doesn't change anything but adding a ban on launching, which requires leading with the helmet, which Pollard didn't do, so under the rule THAT particular call was still bad. Because (for some reason,) the NFL doesn't prohibit deliberate attempts to injure opponents, only particular MEANS of doing so (and incentive bonuses.)

[Joel]

Now that I think about it, throwing in another launching-the-crown ban with the defenseless player rule also angers me, because spearing has ALREADY been illegal—for decades. Once again the NFL misses the point; if we don't enforce the rules, adding MORE can't solve the root problem, only exacerbate it.

[BroncoWave]

Oh... I guess I'm confused. I thought the players knew what they were getting into when signing their big dollar contracts to play a sport.

I'm pretty sure Dread isn't arguing this point. He's just saying he doesn't want to watch a sport in which players permanently get maimed for life just for his amusement (even if they do sign up for those risks).

How much enjoyment can you REALLY take from a guy taking a huge headshot when it's in the back of your mind that that guy probably has a wife and kids who will have to suffer the consequences of their dad/husband being messed up for life after playing football?

[OrangeHoof]

The rules lead to more offense. Which is what I think the NFL wants. It's going to start happening in all sports, I think. I can see the NFL making the field smaller, so people are at full speed less often (for player safety, not to add to scoring, of course).

And like a lot of rules, the exact opposite of what they want will happen. More bodies in a phone booth = more injuries.

[BroncoJoe]

This seems to make it pretty clear to me, since Decker had barely touched the ground with one when hit, let alone become "a runner":


(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;

Has NOTHING to do with leading with the helmet, or hitting him high.

[Northman]

This seems to make it pretty clear to me, since Decker had barely touched the ground with one when hit, let alone become "a runner":



Has NOTHING to do with leading with the helmet, or hitting him high.


That was basically my reasoning as why he go the flag. The hit itself was legit but the issue is when it took place which im sure that is what the ref was looking at.

[TXBRONC]

The Broncos got two TD passes overturned and Pollard whines about the Titans getting the shaft??? Screw Pollard and the horse he rode in on!!!

Well during the game he dropped a potential interception and in doing so he shattered his glass vagina.

[LawDog]

This seems to make it pretty clear to me, since Decker had barely touched the ground with one when hit, let alone become "a runner":



Has NOTHING to do with leading with the helmet, or hitting him high.

That is only half of the equation though, in order for it to be a foul under the rule (1) the receiver has to be in a defenseless position (the part you quoted), and (2) the contact has to be on the receiver's head or neck, or the defender uses the crown of his helmet.

On slow motion, you can see that the second part of the rule is not met so technically it should not have been called. However, because Pollard left his feet and launched upward into Decker I think the ref was erring on the side of caution.

[BroncoJoe]

I haven't read the rule, nor am I an attorney/legally trained, but I'm not sure there's an "and" statement there. If you hit a defenseless receiver, as defined in my quote above, you're going to get flagged.

[chazoe60]

I cringed when I saw the replay because I really think it was a clean hit and I hate when we benefit from bad calls, it makes me feel dirty like how I imagine Patriot fans must feel all the time, but like I said earlier, there was a D-holding call on the same play so the difference was just ten yards which didn't really factor into the final score of the game, so who cares.

[TXBRONC]

Pollard lauched himself at Decker which is also a rule violation.

[Hawgdriver]

I agree that was a bad call ...

Interesting and thoughtful post, thanks.

[GEM]

Get the sand out, buddy.

Do your ******* job!!!!
tkzALAmawfY

Do your ******* job and win the mother****ing game!!

[Ravage!!!]

i vote to ban any videos that show McDoosh.

[chazoe60]

i vote to ban any videos that show McDoosh.

Except snuff films.

[Hawgdriver]

Except snuff films.

Wow. (not sure if good or bad wow)

[Northman]

Missy and i still laugh at this every now and then.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8_buda5vWo

[Ravage!!!]

Missy and i still laugh at this every now and then.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8_buda5vWo

That is HILARIOUS... "My wife wears a Tebow jersey to bed." :lol:

[Ravage!!!]

Except snuff films.

I SECOND this motion!!

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Pollard lauched himself at Decker which is also a rule violation.

Yep, Decker was in the air when he hit him. It's a "defenseless player" rule.

[LawDog]

Yep, Decker was in the air when he hit him. It's a "defenseless player" rule.

Sorry, no. Read the rule as posted by alldayeverydayeverythingyoueverwantedtoknowabout18 (J/K) above. Defenseless is only the first part, you have to hit said defenseless player with the crown of your helmet, or hit them in the neck or helmet area...

[GEM]

It's the discretion of what they ref sees. The hit was pretty brutal, he may have thought it was defenseless. :shrugs:

Pollard can still have nice big glass of ****.

Everyone thinks the opposite side is dirty, cheated, lies, has an unfair advantage. I don't see him running up to the ref correcting them when he interferes and isn't called for it.

Geez.

[Traveler]

It's the discretion of what they ref sees. The hit was pretty brutal, he may have thought it was defenseless. :shrugs:

Pollard can still have nice big glass of ****.

Everyone thinks the opposite side is dirty, cheated, lies, has an unfair advantage. I don't see him running up to the ref correcting them when he interferes and isn't called for it.

Geez.

I'm guessing you're talking about Brady.

[Joel]

Sorry, no. Read the rule as posted by alldayeverydayeverythingyoueverwantedtoknowabout18 (J/K) above. Defenseless is only the first part, you have to hit said defenseless player with the crown of your helmet, or hit them in the neck or helmet area...
That's it, and Pollard did none of those things on THAT play. Personally, I don't know why they put in a new rule saying players can launch the crown of their helmet into opponents: That's spearing, and has ALREADY BEEN ILLEGAL FOR DECADES. There was no need to "re-ban" it, and if they aren't enforcing the existing rule against it, why would they enforce a new one?

If it were just that one play Pollard would have a point, but it's not; he's just using ONE bad call to attack a LOT of other good ones. It's a pretty safe bet he hit Decker in the head on a play that CONCUSSED him, yet he got NO flag for that NOR for taking his helmet off on the field to argue after the play. If he weren't a career NFL criminal he'd probably get the benefit of a doubt, but he is so he doesn't, and that's no ones fault but his, however much he tries to claim persecution or favoritism. Again, if it were just about favoritism to Manning he'd have >1 Ring, Flacco would have <1 and SD would've gotten a fine for violating the Brady/Pollard Rule the last time we played them.

[Broncolingus]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/33705275.jpg

[AllThings18]

Pollard claims that the NFL told him they made a mistake on the call. I don't know if that is just him talking, or if it actually happened. I remember a play last season where a Packer defender had a text book tackle on Andrew Luck, facemask in the middle of the chest, and they flagged/fined him, and the comment was that it was close enough to the "head & neck area", so I'm not sure if the shoulder is "close enough".

I'm okay with that call as it was called. It will be interesting to see if the league makes a formal statement as they did with the Triplette gaffe in Indy where he failed to call the infield fly rule properly in the final two minutes of a half.

[Broncolingus]

Pollard claims that the NFL told him they made a mistake on the call. I don't know if that is just him talking, or if it actually happened. I remember a play last season where a Packer defender had a text book tackle on Andrew Luck, facemask in the middle of the chest, and they flagged/fined him, and the comment was that it was close enough to the "head & neck area", so I'm not sure if the shoulder is "close enough".

I'm okay with that call as it was called. It will be interesting to see if the league makes a formal statement as they did with the Triplette gaffe in Indy where he failed to call the infield fly rule properly in the final two minutes of a half.

I wonder too...

Triplette...:tsk:

...he and his crew's sure do seem to have a lot of high-profile problems lately.

Of course, I'm not going to be starting any 'How Officiating in the NFL Has Sure Improved Over the Past 20-Years' fan clubs anytime soon...

[AllThings18]

I wonder too...

Triplette...:tsk:

...he and his crew's sure do seem to have a lot of high-profile problems lately.

Of course, I'm not going to be starting any 'How Officiating in the NFL Has Sure Improved Over the Past 20-Years' fan clubs anytime soon...

He just sounds incompetent.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

It's no different than the hit Rahim had a couple years ago that got flagged. Whether or not a hit like that is legal an official is usually going to throw a flag if the receiver is extended and defenseless and gets lit up. It's today's NFL.

[Broncolingus]

He just sounds incompetent.

Right...?

:D