Mike Pereira: Nebraska's Bo Pelini once again crosses the line with officials

[Landlord]

 

 

 

If I had one call I could have made Saturday, it would be ejecting the prick who took Ameer Abdullah down by the facemask with extreme predjudice. Could have been a career ender. Worst among several ugly plays. 15 yards didn't do it justice, but Ameer's response came close.

It wasn't a face mask. He took him down with a clothesline by the throat. And while it could be called unnecessary roughness I don't think it is technically illegal.

 

 

Knapp you're spot on! By definition to the letter in no way is that a penalty.

 

Yeah. I was gonna say that was ot a face mask. Not even close. And a friend of mine argued but essentially agreed. What's the defender supposed to do? Now, in the heat of that point in time with had just happened, and pretty stellar argument could be made that there was malicious intent there. But under any other circumstance in a normal game, it would be seen as just a rough tackle. Now, my argument to my friend was that in today's football, that sh#t just dont fly anymore. Remember, Randy Gregory was called for pretty much the exact same kind of tackle on a sack of the Wyoming quarterback last season. And Brock Huard said point blank, that now a days, you just cant get your hands/arms anywhere near the head/neck area.

 

He did not grab the face mask. But unnecessary roughness woulda been the correct call, and given what had just happened moments prior, and ejection would not have been surprising.

 

The non-reaction by the Miami defender on that particular play said it all. He knew what he had done was a penalty.

 

 

 

I never reacted to anything when I was in high school and got called for something in football or basketball, even though most of the time I didn't agree with the call.

 

I don't think you can make any safe conclusions based on that. If it was me, I probably would have been thinking, "sh#t. I didn't facemask him but I bet it looked like I did and the crowd saw it I doubt it won't get flagged."

 

Still vicious though.

[RedDenver]

 

If I had one call I could have made Saturday, it would be ejecting the prick who took Ameer Abdullah down by the facemask with extreme predjudice. Could have been a career ender. Worst among several ugly plays. 15 yards didn't do it justice, but Ameer's response came close.

It wasn't a face mask. He took him down with a clothesline by the throat. And while it could be called unnecessary roughness I don't think it is technically illegal.

 

 

Knapp you're spot on! By definition to the letter in no way is that a penalty.

 

Probably a personal foul:

 

Rule 9 Section 1 (Personal Fouls) Article 2 (aka 9-1-2):

ARTICLE 2. a. No person subject to the rules shall strike an opponent with the

knee; strike an opponent’s helmet (including the face mask), neck, face or any

other part of the body with an extended forearm, elbow, locked hands, palm,

fist, or the heel, back or side of the open hand; or gouge an opponent (A.R.

9-1-2-I).

b. No person subject to the rules shall strike an opponent with his foot or any

part of his leg that is below the knee.

c. There shall be no tripping. (Exception: Tripping the runner is not a foul.)

Might also be targeting and subject to ejection:

Notes to 9-1-3 and 9-1-4

Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes

of attacking with an apparent intent 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:

<snip>

• Leading with helmet, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with contact at the

head or neck area

EDIT: Might actually be a facemask penalty:

9-1-8b. No player shall grasp and then twist, turn or pull the face mask, chin strap

or any helmet opening of an opponent. It is not a foul if the face mask, chin

strap or helmet opening is not grasped and then twisted, turned or pulled.

When in question, it is a foul.

[knapplc]

Did they do away with the clotheslining penalty? That was a big deal in the 70s and 80s, but I haven't heard about it for a while. That's basically what that was, and it could have ended Ameer's career.

 

It was definitely an unnecessary way to tackle him.

 

 

According to the second bullet point in RedDenver's post, in the section pertaining to Targeting, that would have been subject to ejection.

 

 

It's no surprise nobody was ejected from that game. That crew had no control over the shenanigans on the field. That was a pretty crummy crew.

[RedDenver]

Did they do away with the clotheslining penalty? That was a big deal in the 70s and 80s, but I haven't heard about it for a while. That's basically what that was, and it could have ended Ameer's career.

 

It was definitely an unnecessary way to tackle him.

 

 

According to the second bullet point in RedDenver's post, in the section pertaining to Targeting, that would have been subject to ejection.

 

 

It's no surprise nobody was ejected from that game. That crew had no control over the shenanigans on the field. That was a pretty crummy crew.

Quick search on the rules and nothing specifically about "clotheslining" or variations thereof.

[Mavric]

It's no surprise nobody was ejected from that game. That crew had no control over the shenanigans on the field. That was a pretty crummy crew.

 

This. When you're holding a guy back and he knocks your hand away and dives back on the pile while you stand and watch, you have no hope of doing your job.

[RedDenver]

 

It's no surprise nobody was ejected from that game. That crew had no control over the shenanigans on the field. That was a pretty crummy crew.

 

This. When you're holding a guy back and he knocks your hand away and dives back on the pile while you stand and watch, you have no hope of doing your job.

 

I saw that too. You'd think throwing off a ref in order to get back into the fight would get some kind of reaction from the officials.

[jsneb83]

In real time, it had looked like a horse collar.