Gerry hit

[Scratchtown]

Their helmets did touch for a moment on the hit. That's the trouble with the rule. If this was a penalty and an ejection then offensive and defensive linemen should be ejected after every play because they're hitting helmets slightly on every play I'm guessing.

LOL. Lot of difference between a running start and "defenseless" player and lineman that start less than a yard apart.

 

I know you know this but it's funny because that's a horrible example.

---------------------------------

 

It was a horrible call, one of the worst I've ever seen on any level. When ESPN announcers are saying its bad.......it's freaking bad. I'd like to see what Ed Cunningham thought of that play. He's the most liberal of the announcers when it comes to sports.

[Atbone95]

 

This was a terrible call. I think targeting should be eliminated. Refs have always had the authority to eject players under the unnecessary roughness foul. Anyone who has played knows when someone is trying to injure a player and not just make a strong hit for a tackle or block.

 

I know some have called Gerry's tackle being textbook. I don't agree. Planting your face chest high into the runner is not good- neck injuries can result and you can't see if there is a fumble or lateral. He should have lowered his shoulder for a hit between the pads and the knees and wrap up legs. Usually, there will be no Yards After Contact. As my old coach used to say " collar bones can heal but neck injuries don't". Maybe overstated but I believe its the correct way to tackle or block.

 

I don't think Gerry did anything wrong. Football is supposed to be a contact sport and that's why they wear pads and helmets. Hitting hard for intimidation and fumbles is part of the game. Targeting is difficult to define since both bodies may be moving and be unable to change their momentum but both may instinctively duck their heads. They don't call targeting or facemasks when runners put their heads down for a hit or use a stiff arm to the tackler's face or head. I say let them play and have the refs make their judgement calls on those times when a player is intentionally trying to hurt another player,

Unfortunately you couldn't be more wrong. "See what you hit" helps prevent neck injuries. Putting your face into the guys chest is much safer than lowering or turning your head. Gerry's tackle was textbook and saying otherwise is just plain unknowledgeable. Please don't spread this misinformation and if you happen to be responsible for teaching young players how to play the game, it is time for you to retire.

 

That is frightening if, in fact, you happen to be responsible for teaching young players how to play the game, JJ.

[Atbone95]

Sorry, last post before a response, but the conversation here has me pretty upset.

 

 

That video is something I've sure you've all seen, as it's been made pretty popular in the football world. Eric LeGrand hit the ball carrier with his face up and into the carrier's back. The only difference in the two scenarios is speed the hits occur at. The receiver hadn't even had a chance to move yet, so momentum and relative velocities were pretty minimal in Nate's collision. Please don't try to defend "putting your face into the guys chest" as being "safe".

 

 

Before you freak out on me, I understand Nate's hit was a good hit where he attempted to turn his head and lead with the shoulder at the last second. That much was clear. This post is addressing the comments made by posters regarding "safe hits", and not drawing parallels to Nate's tackle.

[Moiraine]

 

 

Their helmets did touch for a moment on the hit. That's the trouble with the rule. If this was a penalty and an ejection then offensive and defensive linemen should be ejected after every play because they're hitting helmets slightly on every play I'm guessing.

LOL. Lot of difference between a running start and "defenseless" player and lineman that start less than a yard apart.

 

I know you know this but it's funny because that's a horrible example.

---------------------------------

 

It was a horrible call, one of the worst I've ever seen on any level. When ESPN announcers are saying its bad.......it's freaking bad. I'd like to see what Ed Cunningham thought of that play. He's the most liberal of the announcers when it comes to sports.

It's not a horrible example. I'm saying the contact between Gerry's helmet and the receiver's helmet was no harder than the contact linemen make when their helmets hit.

 

In general if there's helmet to helmet contact between 2 running players then contact will be much harder than between 2 linemen but not in the example I'm talking about. The tackle was so good that helmet contact was as minimal as it is on the line and if it's a penalty then linemen penalties should be called every play. Therefore it should not be a penalty because that's ridiculous.

[Scratchtown]

 

 

Their helmets did touch for a moment on the hit. That's the trouble with the rule. If this was a penalty and an ejection then offensive and defensive linemen should be ejected after every play because they're hitting helmets slightly on every play I'm guessing.

LOL. Lot of difference between a running start and "defenseless" player and lineman that start less than a yard apart.

 

I know you know this but it's funny because that's a horrible example.

---------------------------------

 

It was a horrible call, one of the worst I've ever seen on any level. When ESPN announcers are saying its bad.......it's freaking bad. I'd like to see what Ed Cunningham thought of that play. He's the most liberal of the announcers when it comes to sports.

It's not a horrible example. I'm saying the contact between Gerry's helmet and the receiver's helmet was no harder than the contact linemen make when their helmets hit.

 

In general if there's helmet to helmet contact between 2 running players then contact will be much harder than between 2 linemen but not in the example I'm talking about. The tackle was so good that helmet contact was as minimal as it is on the line and if it's a penalty then linemen penalties should be called every play. Therefore it should not be a penalty because that's ridiculous.

 

disagree. you're talking about more of a type of hit rather than force. There is more force in Gerry's hit than the Oline, Dline face.....but regardless as I said. It's a horrible call.

 

You wouldn't know if you haven't played. Which is the case in your comment.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

Their helmets did touch for a moment on the hit. That's the trouble with the rule. If this was a penalty and an ejection then offensive and defensive linemen should be ejected after every play because they're hitting helmets slightly on every play I'm guessing.

LOL. Lot of difference between a running start and "defenseless" player and lineman that start less than a yard apart.

 

I know you know this but it's funny because that's a horrible example.

---------------------------------

 

It was a horrible call, one of the worst I've ever seen on any level. When ESPN announcers are saying its bad.......it's freaking bad. I'd like to see what Ed Cunningham thought of that play. He's the most liberal of the announcers when it comes to sports.

It's not a horrible example. I'm saying the contact between Gerry's helmet and the receiver's helmet was no harder than the contact linemen make when their helmets hit.

 

In general if there's helmet to helmet contact between 2 running players then contact will be much harder than between 2 linemen but not in the example I'm talking about. The tackle was so good that helmet contact was as minimal as it is on the line and if it's a penalty then linemen penalties should be called every play. Therefore it should not be a penalty because that's ridiculous.

disagree. you're talking about more of a type of hit rather than force. There is more force in Gerry's hit than the Oline, Dline face.....but regardless as I said. It's a horrible call.

 

You wouldn't know if you haven't played. Which is the case in your comment.

I have played, but that's not relevant to the conversation. I'm talking about one specific play made in one specific game. In Gerry's hit the brunt of the force is in his shoulder and then their helmets tap slightly, similar to that of linemen. It seems like you're arguing just to argue.

 

I'm not talking about force of the tackle. I'm talking about the impact of their helmets, which was minimal imo.

[NUance]

 

Look at the replay of Reilly's run at 1:35:30. Will someone please explain how Gerry's hit was targetting and this hit wasn't? The UCLA guy leads with the crown of his head and hits Reilly square in the helmet.

[JJ Husker]

Sorry, last post before a response, but the conversation here has me pretty upset.

 

 

That video is something I've sure you've all seen, as it's been made pretty popular in the football world. Eric LeGrand hit the ball carrier with his face up and into the carrier's back. The only difference in the two scenarios is speed the hits occur at. The receiver hadn't even had a chance to move yet, so momentum and relative velocities were pretty minimal in Nate's collision. Please don't try to defend "putting your face into the guys chest" as being "safe".

 

 

Before you freak out on me, I understand Nate's hit was a good hit where he attempted to turn his head and lead with the shoulder at the last second. That much was clear. This post is addressing the comments made by posters regarding "safe hits", and not drawing parallels to Nate's tackle.

My point was, all things being equal, seeing what you hit or "heads up" tackling is safer for the tackler than lowering your head or shoulder. Not sure how you read that otherwise. In the case of Gerry's particular hit on this play, I don't see how he could've hit the guy in a better manner. There will always be exceptions and dangers inherent, it is still a contact sport. Sure it would be preferable to keep your head up and also not have to plant your face in the guys chest but that is still better than lowering your shoulder or head.

[cm husker]

The hilarious thing is the call wasn't even that the ruling "stands" it was "confirmed"

I think that gets at the idea that "intent" isn't reviewed. Just whether helmet contact was made.

 

The rule clearly needs to be rewritten/reworked. But we won't see that happen because no admin bubba is going to want his name attached to "softening" an anti-concussion rule.

[cm husker]

Best way to miss a tackle is to "turn your head and lead with a shoulder." It also doesn't reduce the risk of injury.

 

You won't hear a decent football coach ever teach that technique.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

"I've seen a lot of good football plays and I thought that was a very good football play," UCLA coach Jim Mora said. "I was stunned that he got thrown out of the game, quite frankly." LINK

You can actually see him talking to Gerry after the hit and during the review. Mora says great tackle at the very end and was joking with Gerry.

I noticed that. Good job to Mora.

[RedTexan]

Do we know who the replay official was? Is the name of the replay official ever made known? The officials on the field can't hide behind the vail of anonymity, why can the replay official, if that's the case? Maybe he's a homer for UCLA.

[BigRedBuster]

Ya'll are vicious. How did so many people misread his post?

 

 

He should have lowered his shoulder for a hit between the pads and the knees and wrap up legs.

That statement is correct. Any contact of helmet to pads is less than ideal. As long as the head is UP (which I think his statement is clearly saying is necessary), ideal contact is head up, leading with a shoulder around the midsection and arms wrapped around.

 

First image when googling "proper tackling form" is this:

 

Look at that. Head is up, tackler leads with his shoulder, not his facemask, and everyone continues to play the game.

 

Those who are suggesting that putting your facemask in someone's chest and driving forward is the proper way to tackle are wrong. Does it get the job done? Yes. Does it have a higher probability of hurting your neck? Yes. Gerry's tackle was a great tackle, don't get me wrong. But, fundamentally, it wasn't the best or "textbook" - the picture above is textbook. Now, I'm not saying that is realistic for every tackle to be made like the picture above. At all - too many moving parts at higher and higher speeds as the level of competition increases. No ball carrier gets hit standing still. But, IDEAL scenario, the tackle looks similar to the picture.

 

So, in turn, if those same people are in charge of teaching youth how to tackle, they should probably learn proper technique or watch a lot of USA Football's Heads Up Tackling videos.

The only difference between the picture you posted and Gerry's tackle is that the kid in your pic is standing straight up and the receiver Gerry tackled is lowering his body to take the hit.

 

Gerry's tackle was very well done.

[Mavric]

[Atbone95]

"leading with a shoulder" and "seeing what you hit" are NOT mutually exclusive things.