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!

     

Fallout from Norman vs Beckham


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, imminent rogaine said:

If they did this, they would need to re-define what a personal foul is. Taunting, inadvertent late hits, inadvertent face masks, these things shouldn't be grounds for ejection. You want to limit intentional, malicious hits and plays, so only those types of plays should be "personal fouls".

 

Yeah. Josh riding his horse and waving to Bortles was a personal foul for him. If he did that and then hit a guy late (and it was debatable) that would be an ejection, which would be bullsh*t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

two 'ejectable offenses' is certainly enough.  They can use a system similar to flagrant fouls in basketball.  You can have a normal, hard foul that earns a 'personal foul' 15yd penalty, but is just a hard game foul.  You also have a flagrant 2 type foul that is extraneous, and earns a warning.  do it again, you're gone and get a suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just distinguish between regular personal fouls and flagrant ones. Two flagrant fouls means ejection. 

 

This solves the issue of accidental personal fouls, like facemasks. Add a sentence to the in-game explanation. 

 

"Personal foul, Facemask, 53 defense. 15 yard penalty from the end of the run, first down".

 

" personal foul, hit to the head of a defenseless player. 53 defense. This is his first flagrant foul. 15 yard penalty, first down".

 

Obviously, in my explanation, the hit to the head wasn't accidental. It was like Burfict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously? That needed  a new rule in order for the refs to figure out that Beckham needed to be kicked out of that game? When a guy takes a 10yd head start and spears another player in the head, away from the play mind you, then he needs to go. Hell, I would say the same thing if Norman did something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mother Grabber said:

two 'ejectable offenses' is certainly enough.  They can use a system similar to flagrant fouls in basketball.  You can have a normal, hard foul that earns a 'personal foul' 15yd penalty, but is just a hard game foul.  You also have a flagrant 2 type foul that is extraneous, and earns a warning.  do it again, you're gone and get a suspension.

Exactly what I was thinking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think an unintended consequence will be referees shying away from calling personal fouls. They want the best players on the field for the sake of the Shield. Who's to say they will still throw the flag when, say, JJ Watt swats at a QB's hands and makes contact with the head? Watt is a superstar - I don't think the refs will risk ejecting him. Therefore, I believe the flag will stay tucked in the pocket.

edit: I bet this is the exact reason Odell wasn't ejected

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Darth Biscuit said:

Eh, depends, and I don't know that this is the right solution...

 

Ejection is kind of a "know it when you see it" thing and the Beckham situation definitely was and they screwed it up...

No kidding. Remember when Luke was ejected for touching an official? The ref was tugging all over him in a pile and he couldn't see him, thinking he was an opposing player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they go down this road, they will have to very carefully draw the line and leave no grey area that would be up to referee interpretation.

I would hate to see the NFL turn into an NBA-type situation where if a guy is amped up and gets a PF early for an unsportsmanlike penalty or something similar, then the other team takes a strategy of trying to bait that player into a cheap retaliatory PF that would get that guy tossed.

I'm all for player safety, and Beckham's actions don't belong on a football field, but not at the expense of the integrity of the game.  It would have to be crystal clear, there would be too much at stake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...