Whitner helmet hit legal

Attached Thumbnails · 01-15-2012, 03:42 PM

NFL: Saints' Thomas not defenseless, Whitner helmet hit legal

Whitner was not penalized because the tackle was not against a defenseless player. Helmet-to-helmet hits are banned against defenseless players in eight categories, and a runner is not one of those categories. Thomas was considered a runner because he had made a catch, turned and made a "football move" before being hit.

NFL: Saints' Thomas not defenseless, Whitner helmet hit legal - NFL - CBSSports.com News, Rumors, Scores, Stats, Fantasy Advice

I say

Halo · 01-15-2012, 03:47 PM

I need a rule book to keep up with this. I think either they call helmet on helmet all the time or stop doing it at all. The definition of "defenseless player" is subjective at best.

W. Kovacs · 01-15-2012, 03:50 PM

I actually agree with the NFL on this one (there were other non-calls that I thought were bs).

The Defender didn't launch his helmet into the player or anything along those lines.

Was it a vicious hit? Absolutely. But if you're going to take away vicious hits, why bother with the game?

Where I think the NFL is really guilty is in their equipment requirements. There are helmets out there that do a much better job at protecting from head injuries. Why aren't they used?

My theory is that they are 1) more expensive and 2) not made by the company that they have under licensing contracts to make their equipment. Again, just a theory, though...

|Mitch| · 01-15-2012, 03:51 PM

I agree! Can't call helmet to helmets only sometimes, either get rid of the rule or get strict!

SapperSaint · 01-15-2012, 03:51 PM

Of coarse it was legal...... it was a hit on a Saints player!

This is for the guy who saw it and didn't throw a flag and for the guy who said it was legal.

OldMaid · 01-15-2012, 04:16 PM

Totally ridiculous rule.
Helment to helment, head butt should never be allowed with all that is out there , proven facts, about concussions.
It should be allowed all of the time or not at all if you have this rule.

Danno · 01-15-2012, 05:22 PM

We'd eliminate football if you couldn't hit RB's. RB's put their head down to break tackles.

It was a perfectly legal hit. I fear the day they outlaw helmet to helmet on every player. The NFL would cease to exist.

gandhi1007 · 01-15-2012, 06:39 PM

What they failed to include in this article is that Whitner lead with his helmet, which is in fact, ILLEGAL. The league actually issued warnings at the beginning of the year to each team for this exact subject......YOU MAY NOT LEAD WITH THE HEAD WHEN TACKLING!

gandhi1007 · 01-15-2012, 06:44 PM

Just so we can end this debate now:

"It has been broadcast at every level not to lead with your head."

- Dr. Hunt Batjer, co-chairman for the NFL's Brain, Head and Neck Medical Committee

NFL.com news: League could suspend players for helmet-to-helmet hits

Beastmode · 01-16-2012, 07:16 AM

Originally Posted by W. Kovacs

I actually agree with the NFL on this one (there were other non-calls that I thought were bs).

The Defender didn't launch his helmet into the player or anything along those lines.

Was it a vicious hit? Absolutely. But if you're going to take away vicious hits, why bother with the game?

Where I think the NFL is really guilty is in their equipment requirements. There are helmets out there that do a much better job at protecting from head injuries. Why aren't they used?

My theory is that they are 1) more expensive and 2) not made by the company that they have under licensing contracts to make their equipment. Again, just a theory, though...

Even if these helmets are better it's marginal at best. The amount of force from a hit like PT took, I'm willing to bet it's worse than getting hit in the head with a baseball bat at full force. No helmet can 100% protect the brain in that situation. It's going to get rattled in there. They need to just go ahead and make any helmet to helmet contact illegal. It takes away from the game but so what. It's a game.

01-15-2012, 03:42 PM	#1
Threaded by iceshack149 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Fairbanks, AK Posts: 4,258 Blog Entries: 1 Rating: (0 votes - average) NFL: Saints' Thomas not defenseless, Whitner helmet hit legal Whitner was not penalized because the tackle was not against a defenseless player. Helmet-to-helmet hits are banned against defenseless players in eight categories, and a runner is not one of those categories. Thomas was considered a runner because he had made a catch, turned and made a "football move" before being hit. NFL: Saints' Thomas not defenseless, Whitner helmet hit legal - NFL - CBSSports.com News, Rumors, Scores, Stats, Fantasy Advice I say Attached Thumbnails
Views: 3770

01-15-2012, 03:47 PM	#2
Halo Site Donor MONTHLY Join Date: May 2002 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 20,605 Blog Entries: 45	I need a rule book to keep up with this. I think either they call helmet on helmet all the time or stop doing it at all. The definition of "defenseless player" is subjective at best. saintfan, OldMaid, Rueben Mayes and 2 others like this.

01-15-2012, 03:51 PM	#4
\|Mitch\| 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Alexandria, La Posts: 11,303	I agree! Can't call helmet to helmets only sometimes, either get rid of the rule or get strict! G504 and OldMaid like this.

01-15-2012, 03:51 PM	#5
SapperSaint Pink Nightmare Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 3,028 Blog Entries: 7	Of coarse it was legal...... it was a hit on a Saints player! This is for the guy who saw it and didn't throw a flag and for the guy who said it was legal. OldMaid likes this.

01-15-2012, 05:22 PM	#7
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	We'd eliminate football if you couldn't hit RB's. RB's put their head down to break tackles. It was a perfectly legal hit. I fear the day they outlaw helmet to helmet on every player. The NFL would cease to exist. W. Kovacs likes this.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

01-15-2012, 03:50 PM	#3
W. Kovacs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 514	I actually agree with the NFL on this one (there were other non-calls that I thought were bs). The Defender didn't launch his helmet into the player or anything along those lines. Was it a vicious hit? Absolutely. But if you're going to take away vicious hits, why bother with the game? Where I think the NFL is really guilty is in their equipment requirements. There are helmets out there that do a much better job at protecting from head injuries. Why aren't they used? My theory is that they are 1) more expensive and 2) not made by the company that they have under licensing contracts to make their equipment. Again, just a theory, though...

01-15-2012, 04:16 PM	#6
OldMaid Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 2,910 Blog Entries: 3	Totally ridiculous rule. Helment to helment, head butt should never be allowed with all that is out there , proven facts, about concussions. It should be allowed all of the time or not at all if you have this rule.

01-15-2012, 06:39 PM	#8
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	What they failed to include in this article is that Whitner lead with his helmet, which is in fact, ILLEGAL. The league actually issued warnings at the beginning of the year to each team for this exact subject......YOU MAY NOT LEAD WITH THE HEAD WHEN TACKLING! Rueben Mayes and halloween 65 like this.

01-15-2012, 06:44 PM	#9
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	Just so we can end this debate now: "It has been broadcast at every level not to lead with your head." - Dr. Hunt Batjer, co-chairman for the NFL's Brain, Head and Neck Medical Committee NFL.com news: League could suspend players for helmet-to-helmet hits

01-16-2012, 07:16 AM	#10
Beastmode 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 9,126	Originally Posted by W. Kovacs I actually agree with the NFL on this one (there were other non-calls that I thought were bs). The Defender didn't launch his helmet into the player or anything along those lines. Was it a vicious hit? Absolutely. But if you're going to take away vicious hits, why bother with the game? Where I think the NFL is really guilty is in their equipment requirements. There are helmets out there that do a much better job at protecting from head injuries. Why aren't they used? My theory is that they are 1) more expensive and 2) not made by the company that they have under licensing contracts to make their equipment. Again, just a theory, though... Even if these helmets are better it's marginal at best. The amount of force from a hit like PT took, I'm willing to bet it's worse than getting hit in the head with a baseball bat at full force. No helmet can 100% protect the brain in that situation. It's going to get rattled in there. They need to just go ahead and make any helmet to helmet contact illegal. It takes away from the game but so what. It's a game. G504 and WHO_DAT_CAT like this.
Beastmode 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 9,126

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/40427-whitner-helmet-hit-legal.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Whitner helmet hit legal	This thread	Refback	01-16-2012 07:52 AM	2