Another tackling technique no no rule

[trents]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/398 ... -technique

[Aseahawkfan]

Too bad we couldn't find another Marshawn. No hip drop tackling just makes it that much harder to stop a beast like Marshawn.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

I'm hoping they'll call this right. The defense has enough of the burden of player safety to have to take another hit in that department. What needs to be avoided is the defender whipping his legs into the ball carrier's legs as he's performing the hip drop. Pretty that's what got Geno last season; scary bit of tackling.

[4XPIPS]

This will severely alter the game, and not sure what the alternative would be for a defender chasing down a ball carrier. There was already a discussion about the amazing run down DK had on Buddha Baker. That play would now be deemed illegal and result in a penalty.

How many third and longs will be gifted 15 yards and a first down when a QB dumps it down for a check down or a screen and a defender is chasing from behind?

[NorthHawk]

I don’t understand it as just tackling from behind, but also grabbing a player by the waist and swinging into him and landing on his legs. If I’m right, DKs tackle wouldn’t be considered a penalty under the new rule.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

This will severely alter the game, and not sure what the alternative would be for a defender chasing down a ball carrier. There was already a discussion about the amazing run down DK had on Buddha Baker. That play would now be deemed illegal and result in a penalty.

How many third and longs will be gifted 15 yards and a first down when a QB dumps it down for a check down or a screen and a defender is chasing from behind?

I read the penalty hinges on taking out the ball carrier’s legs as the defender does the hip drop. I am hoping that if the defenders lower body drops to the ground without touching the ball carrier’s legs, then it shouldn’t be a penalty.

ETA: Metcalf’s tackle on Baker shouldn’t be penalty under this rule. Both Baker’s and Metcalf’s upper bodies go forward in the take down with both their legs trailing behind him. What they want to prevent is the ball carrier’s upper body falling backward while his legs stay directly under him a la what happens in a horse collar tackle.

[c_hawkbob]

DK didn't hip drop Baker.

[jshawaii22]

Tonight NFL network ran the instant classic Seahawks OT playoff against GB. In the OT just before the incredible game winner, watch the up the sidelines 30 yard pass to Doug Baldwin. He was tackled with a perfect, now outlawed hip-drop tackle. Note the defender come from angled to the side, wrap him around the waist and take his weight off to drop Dougie down, with his legs folding underneath him. I can see how that can cause injuries.

[Uppercut]

NFL will soon be converting the league and methods of play to Pickleball

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Tonight NFL network ran the instant classic Seahawks OT playoff against GB. In the OT just before the incredible game winner, watch the up the sidelines 30 yard pass to Doug Baldwin. He was tackled with a perfect, now outlawed hip-drop tackle. Note the defender come from angled to the side, wrap him around the waist and take his weight off to drop Dougie down, with his legs folding underneath him. I can see how that can cause injuries.

I wonder how close they will call it. The defender on that one put one of his knees forward as he hip dropped. I don't think he was intentionally trying to get his knee into Baldwins legs, but, then again, how is anyone supposed to know for sure?

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

NFL will soon be converting the league and methods of play to Pickleball

Said every time they make a rule related to player safety. We're not there yet; not by a long shot.

[jshawaii22]

I wonder how close they will call it. The defender on that one put one of his knees forward as he hip dropped. I don't think he was intentionally trying to get his knee into Baldwins legs, but, then again, how is anyone supposed to know for sure?

[/quote]

I have no idea how refs will call it. Is it reviewable?

[NorthHawk]

I've heard the talking heads suggest it will begin with fines on Monday because it's so difficult to determine they type of tackle in many cases.
I suspect it would then evolve into a 'Point of emphasis' and then we would see the flags.

[4XPIPS]

I read the penalty hinges on taking out the ball carrier’s legs as the defender does the hip drop. I am hoping that if the defenders lower body drops to the ground without touching the ball carrier’s legs, then it shouldn’t be a penalty.

ETA: Metcalf’s tackle on Baker shouldn’t be penalty under this rule. Both Baker’s and Metcalf’s upper bodies go forward in the take down with both their legs trailing behind him. What they want to prevent is the ball carrier’s upper body falling backward while his legs stay directly under him a la what happens in a horse collar tackle.

I am not the only who agrees this new rule would have been deemed this tackle potential illegal.

Here is Wyman & Bob talking about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ez4LNBvLf8

Here is the actual play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J62GsevPwiQ

DK Metcalf does land on his back feet for a brief moment when he rolls over to the elft.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

I am not the only who agrees this new rule would have been deemed this tackle potential illegal.

Here is Wyman & Bob talking about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ez4LNBvLf8

Here is the actual play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J62GsevPwiQ

DK Metcalf does land on his back feet for a brief moment when he rolls over to the elft.

And I still disagree with their take. Landing on the feet isn't the issue it's the orientation, in my opinion. If the ball carrier's and the defender's legs both go backwards while they go forward, I don't see how that's going to get called. Metcalf didn't use his legs to take out Baker's legs and pull him down backwards. That's what they are trying to avoid. And I did say touching, but I'm talking about taking the ball carrier's legs out, not incidental contact as they are both going down.

That's my hope of how they'll call it; my guess is it will take some time to get consistent.

[NorthHawk]

There was a story that had examples of hip drop tackles provided by the NFL and DK's tackle wasn't anything close to that.
What seemed to be the theme they want taken out of the tackle is the defender swinging into the back of the legs/knees with their hip/butt, not tackling from behind.
The Wyman clip to me seemed like he was someone who didn't like the change and was purposely trying to confuse people by selecting an example and taking it to the extreme limits of what might be called.
On the other hand, they are calling Horse Collar tackles where the player isn't taken to the ground or even tackled, so maybe they will take it too far.

[4XPIPS]

There was a story that had examples of hip drop tackles provided by the NFL and DK's tackle wasn't anything close to that.
What seemed to be the theme they want taken out of the tackle is the defender swinging into the back of the legs/knees with their hip/butt, not tackling from behind.
The Wyman clip to me seemed like he was someone who didn't like the change and was purposely trying to confuse people by selecting an example and taking it to the extreme limits of what might be called.
On the other hand, they are calling Horse Collar tackles where the player isn't taken to the ground or even tackled, so maybe they will take it too far.

No call in the NFL is 100% clean or accurate when flagged. I can remember when Richard Sherman was called for a face mask on Julian Edelman, and Richard was protesting that he grabbed the jersey below the helmet and pulled Edelman around for a tackle, and replay proved that was the case, but yet he was still flagged for a face mask when he never grabbed the facemask.

I believe refs do their best to manage the game with the correct calls, but we see week after week bad no calls, or horrible calls that are clearly not the case. This new rule opens up another avenue of calls that will be close/should be called/ should not be called/ hmm iffy, and again will favor an offense at times and most likely alter the flow of the game. How many screen passes, or check downs we see on 3rd and longs and defenders will be chasing the running back/wide receiver from behind and tackle from behind that could inherently result in a rule violation and a 15 yard penalty and new set of downs.

I understand the rule is in place to protect players, but the real question is why have we not institute a more streamline process when it comes to calls vs no calls being reviewed via instant replay. How many times we have seen a play that is under review, and with all the TV angles and replays we can clearly determine the outcome with in let's say 45 secs of a couple of replays and yet it still takes the on field referee over 4 mins to make a decision. I don't disagree with the rules, but with all the high tech camera's and how fast we can process info these days why can't we get that correlated quicker on the field so we can't have messed up bad calls or no calls corrected?

[NorthHawk]

You are right about the refereeing not being consistent from crew to crew. Most teams announce to their players who the referees are and then they know what they can get away with.
And all penalties (or non calls) are being scrutinized to a larger degree than ever before.

I had read that there is going to be a new referee looking at replays of plays in the stadium near the press boxes to correct the obvious mistakes on the field. I got the impression that they weren't there to call the penalties, but rather to make sure the penalties were in fact a penalty along with procedural penalties like making sure the ball is placed at the proper spot, time was left on the clock when the ball was snapped, whether a player was in fact lined up off side, or if an illegal formation was used - things like that.

I would suspect that they would also be reviewing the new tackling penalty as well, but they will probably err on the side of caution on close calls and let the league fine the player if it's determined to be an illegal tackle.
In time it will probably become more common to call on the field as both players and referees adjust to how to call it or not. There aren't a lot of these types of tackles so it will be interesting how it works out.