Cracked 2 Helmets

[901 Orange]

I

Here you go......


ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at leastone indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul


Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area



Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent d whose forward progress has been stopped

Watch the replay forwards or backwards does not matter..... in the grasp and first contact with Helmet and then shoulder to the head and neck area.... passes both tests in the rule.... also notice CROWN is not required.

We know what the rules are my man. You simply made my point. Let's go through your highlighted parts.

Article 4: Cody Simon never made FORCIBLE CONTACT to a defenseless player. It's not even a question that Nico was a runner.

Indicators: Simon didn't lead with his helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, or elbow with FORCIBLE CONTACT to Nico's head or neck. Simon is literally breaking down in front of him. He never lunged at Nico so how on Earth can it possibly be FORCIBLE CONTACT?!

Defenseless player: Nico’s forward progress had not been stopped. The whistle had not been blown and he is clearly still moving forward. The fact that Nico is able to lower his head and initiate contact to Simon's shoulder clearly shows that.

You are wrong on this one my friend. I'm not sure if it's VFL bias or misinterpretation of what those rules are specifically talking about.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Agree 1000%. WHERE WAS THE TARGETING CALL ON THAT PLAY???

Because it wasn’t.

Are people blind? Nico lowered his head into the defender.

It wasn’t mentioned because it WASN’T F’N TARGETING

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Here you go......


ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at leastone indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul


Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area



Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped

Watch the replay forwards or backwards does not matter..... in the grasp and first contact with Helmet and then shoulder to the head and neck area.... passes both tests in the rule.... also notice CROWN is not required.

Nico lowered his head into the defender.

You guys are grasping at straws

 

[easttnbuck]

Here you go......


ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at leastone indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul


Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area



Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped

Watch the replay forwards or backwards does not matter..... in the grasp and first contact with Helmet and then shoulder to the head and neck area.... passes both tests in the rule.... also notice CROWN is not required.

Who was he in the grasp of? Nico was not defenseless at all either.

Guess we stopped playing football around these parts

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I

We know what the rules are my man. You simply made my point. Let's go through your highlighted parts.

Article 4: Cody Simon never made FORCIBLE CONTACT to a defenseless player. It's not even a question that Nico was a runner.

Indicators: Simon didn't lead with his helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, or elbow with FORCIBLE CONTACT to Nico's head or neck. Simon is literally breaking down in front of him. He never lunged at Nico so how on Earth can it possibly be FORCIBLE CONTACT?!

Defenseless player: Nico’s forward progress had not been stopped. The whistle had not been blown and he is clearly still moving forward. The fact that Nico is able to lower his head and initiate contact to Simon's shoulder clearly shows that.

You are wrong on this one my friend. I'm not sure if it's VFL bias or misinterpretation of what those rules are specifically talking about.

It’s clearly Vol bias. There is no way in hell if the roles were reversed they’d say it was targeting. They’d point out the QB lowered his head.

If you actually think that was targeting you should stop watching football. You’re also probably the same people who whine about the wussification of football.

 

[Behr]

I believe targeting was mentioned in the broadcast because I remember commenting on it. But it was only mentioned before the replay. Then it was clear it wasn't.

And it wasn't targeting. Not even by Nico. Lol.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I

We know what the rules are my man. You simply made my point. Let's go through your highlighted parts.

Article 4: Cody Simon never made FORCIBLE CONTACT to a defenseless player. It's not even a question that Nico was a runner.

Indicators: Simon didn't lead with his helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, or elbow with FORCIBLE CONTACT to Nico's head or neck. Simon is literally breaking down in front of him. He never lunged at Nico so how on Earth can it possibly be FORCIBLE CONTACT?!

Defenseless player: Nico’s forward progress had not been stopped. The whistle had not been blown and he is clearly still moving forward. The fact that Nico is able to lower his head and initiate contact to Simon's shoulder clearly shows that.

You are wrong on this one my friend. I'm not sure if it's VFL bias or misinterpretation of what those rules are specifically talking about.

So you are saying pansy ass contact busted his helmet? Where did the crack come from? The defender is in the pics before and after the crack. Guess Nico whacked his own head. The attached replay no longer functions.

Was there not a guy hanging onto his leg, that meets the in the grasp note? Did not meet the ball carrier being down, but that is separate note option.

Way more met the rule than our face mask call. Contact with face mask is not a foul. Rule specifically says it must be grasped AND THE HEAD HAS TO BE TWISTED.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

So you are saying pansy ass contact busted his helmet? Where did the crack come from? The defender is in the pics before and after the crack. Guess Nico whacked his own head. The attached replay no longer functions.

Was there not a guy hanging onto his leg, that meets the in the grasp note? Did not meet the ball carrier being down, but that is separate note option.

Way more met the rule than our face mask call. Contact with face mask is not a foul. Rule specifically says it must be grasped AND THE HEAD HAS TO BE TWISTED.

Dude you are straight up just wrong. Are actually blind? The QB’s head DID twist on the facemask.

There is no controversy with that call, it is called 100% of the time. The only ones whining about either call are delusional Vol fans.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Nico lowered his head into the defender.

You guys are grasping at straws

AND was contacted from the side on his ear hole by the front of the defenders helmet. Right where the crack is. Imagine that! He, as do most ball carriers, is trying to avoid the defender, while the defender, as most do, is trying to initiate contact, and DID.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Dude you are straight up just wrong. Are actually blind? The QB’s head DID twist on the facemask.

There is no controversy with that call, it is called 100% of the time. The only ones whining about either call are delusional Vol fans.

Show me a visual where the fingers are inside the facemask or helmet opening. Not pressing on the outside. Meeting some kind of definition of grasping. Maybe throw in a clip where the helmet movement is a result of same and not just movement as his hand rakes across the face mask. My memory anyway. Has to be twisted while in the grasp.

Why, here it is from the rule book.

b. No player shall grasp and then twist, turn or pull the face mask, chin straor any helmet opening of an opponent. It is not a foul if the face mask, chinstrap or helmet opening is not grasped and then twisted, turned or pulled

 

[VolsSportsFan]

AND was contacted from the side on his ear hole by the front of the defenders helmet. Right where the crack is. Imagine that! He, as do most ball carriers, is trying to avoid the defender, while the defender, as most do, is trying to initiate contact, and DID.

Die on the hill all you want, the only people agreeing are fellow delusional Vol fans.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Because it wasn’t.

JFC are people blind? Nico lowered his head into the defender.

It wasn’t mentioned because it WASN’T F’N TARGETING

You mean while in the grasp of the first defender and falling to the ground he tried to attack the not yet arrived defender by violently punishing him with his ear hole? RIGHT.... And that is not contact to he head and neck area... RIGHT AGAIN... Nico is using his helmet for protection, the other guy not so much. He fails the eyes up defense too and clearly used the crown to contact Nico. See the crack fresh off the press.

 

[UTFanForLife]

I

We know what the rules are my man. You simply made my point. Let's go through your highlighted parts.

Article 4: Cody Simon never made FORCIBLE CONTACT to a defenseless player. It's not even a question that Nico was a runner.

Indicators: Simon didn't lead with his helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, or elbow with FORCIBLE CONTACT to Nico's head or neck. Simon is literally breaking down in front of him. He never lunged at Nico so how on Earth can it possibly be FORCIBLE CONTACT?!

Defenseless player: Nico’s forward progress had not been stopped. The whistle had not been blown and he is clearly still moving forward. The fact that Nico is able to lower his head and initiate contact to Simon's shoulder clearly shows that.

You are wrong on this one my friend. I'm not sure if it's VFL bias or misinterpretation of what those rules are specifically talking about.

It wasn’t targeting. But helmet to helmet was the first contact, then Nico’s helmet hit the defenders shoulder. I would assume the crack came from the helmet to helmet part. You can see the helmets bounce off each other in the replay you posted.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

It wasn’t targeting. But helmet to helmet was the first contact, then Nico’s helmet hit the defenders shoulder. I would assume the crack came from the helmet to helmet part. You can see the helmets bounce off each other in the replay you posted.

Once again, one of THE defined indicators for targeting.......................

Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area

Sure seems to qualify to me. Why do you think it is not, especially with Nico having legal defenseless status for being in the grasp of the first defender? I think this could have qualified for both rules with the definition of CROWN being what it is. If the contact was above the facemask of the defender.

 

[UTFanForLife]

Once again, one of THE defined indicators for targeting.......................

Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area

Sure seems to qualify to me. Why do you think it is not, especially with Nico having legal helpless status for being in the grasp of the first defender? I think this could have qualified for both rules with the definition of CROWN being what it is. If the contact was above the facemask of the defender.

At that point he was a runner, so not defenseless. Then his forward progress was not stopped even with him being grasped.

I feel like RBs take that type of hit multiple times a game. They don’t even show replays of those usually.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

At that point he was a runner, so not defenseless. Then his forward progress was not stopped even with him being grasped.

I feel like RBs take that type of hit multiple times a game. They don’t even show replays of those usually.

What part of the in the grasp part of the supplied rule do you not understand? He was by rule defenseless and the second defender forcibly contacted his head and neck area hard enough to crack his helmet. Both required elements of the rule satisfied. The guy could have contacted his numbers or lower but did not break his helmet with incidental contact.

 

[UTFanForLife]

What part of the in the grasp part of the supplied rule do you not understand? He was by rule defenseless and the second defender forcibly contacted his head and neck area hard enough to crack his helmet. Both required elements of the rule satisfied. The guy could have contacted his numbers or lower but did not break his helmet with incidental contact.

You linked the rule. It literally says in the grasp and forward progress has stopped. Forward progress was not stopped.

 

[901 Orange]

It’s clearly Vol bias. There is no way in hell if the roles were reversed they’d say it was targeting. They’d point out the QB lowered his head.

If you actually think that was targeting you should stop watching football. You’re also probably the same people who whine about the wussification of football.

Exactly

 

[LAVol1]

Plastic composite gets very brittle at 15 degrees. All the MORE reason not to play these Playoffs in that weather. Asinine. UT Officials should be in somebody's ear. LOUDLY. That breakdown could result in permanent injury. Not to mention the human body is more susceptible to injury in that environment. Asinine.

Maybe the impact to the head is less when the helmet gives resulting in a crack--kind of like a car's front end collapsing absorbing the impact?

 

[LAVol1]

Two cracked helmets in one game? Does the helmet manufacturer not bear responsibility for their inferior product putting athletes at risk of serious injury or even death? It's ridiculous to think that anyone is selling a HELMET made of materials that will crack in cold weather. It's not like they were playing in the dead of winter in the Arctic Circle.

Honestly, it makes me angry to think about how these athletes trust their helmets to protect them, only for them to fail under cold weather conditions when everyone knows football is often played in extreme conditions. The equipment manufacturers have GOT to put money into research until they come up with a more all-weather-conditions-durable product!

Did the helmet fail to protect Nico? He didn't get concussed on a vicious helmet to helmet hit, so I would say the helmet did its job quite well. Had the helmet not caved, he might have been concussed.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

At that point he was a runner, so not defenseless. Then his forward progress was not stopped even with him being grasped.

I feel like RBs take that type of hit multiple times a game. They don’t even show replays of those usually.

How about supplying a catalog of replays showing helmet to helmet contact breaking the other guys helmet with no review for targeting.

 

[C-south]

Are people still crying over this? It wasn’t targeting and wasn’t called targeting.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

You mean while in the grasp of the first defender and falling to the ground he tried to attack the not yet arrived defender by violently punishing him with his ear hole? RIGHT.... And that is not contact to he head and neck area... RIGHT AGAIN... Nico is using his helmet for protection, the other guy not so much. He fails the eyes up defense too and clearly used the crown to contact Nico. See the crack fresh off the press.

View attachment 710063


View attachment 710055

At this point you're lost. if you look at those images and at it at full speed or even slow speed and you say it was defensive targeting, I repeat....you need to stop watching football. It's not even close to targeting.

I don't know if you just are getting off on being this wrong or you're just too stubborn to admit you've dug yourself into a hole and there's no way out.

 

[rocytop2624]

True and the two that cracked were the new one which are very expensive.

After the first one cracked he was wearing the one from the concussion.

 

[FanDude]

Plastic composite gets very brittle at 15 degrees. All the MORE reason not to play these Playoffs in that weather. Asinine. UT Officials should be in somebody's ear. LOUDLY. That breakdown could result in permanent injury. Not to mention the human body is more susceptible to injury in that environment. Asinine.

I must have seemed like a wet blanket saying that before the game, but I did. That is not a time to decide such things. Everyone needs to be thinking, "Let's do this."