Lowering Helmet Rule: Three Criteria

The Raider coverage really irritated me in the lack of understanding regarding the lowering of the helmet as to why Michael was NOT called for a penalty. I could tell right away, but one of my biggest pet peeves is when announcers don't know the rules of the games they are covering. It's their job to know.

The rule only applies outside the tackle box or three yards past the line of scrimmage.

There are THREE components to this foul:

First, the player must line up his opponent.
Second, he must lower his head.
And third, he must initiate contact with and deliver a forcible blow with the crown of his helmet to any part of his opponent’s body. The crown is the very top of the helmet.

If any of the criteria is not met, it is NOT a foul under this new rule.

End Rant.

Michael was clearly running at an angle and did NOT line up his opponent. Thus, no foul. It is NOT simply lowering the helmet that causes this new rule to come into effect.

Now that the NFL law suit is settled my prediction is that this penalty is never called.

It really not that big a deal. Takes a lot to fill all the criteria.

JSeahawks":3m4aavz0 said:

Now that the NFL law suit is settled my prediction is that this penalty is never called.

Click to expand...

LOL I hope you are right but I will take that bet and raise you that it is called more than once to prove they (the NFL) are being proactive.

I don't know what feed you were watching, but it was discussed as not a penalty on my feed. Really if your going to get mad about calls, I would hope they were at least called

seatownboy":fut8gq88 said:

I don't know what feed you were watching, but it was discussed as not a penalty on my feed. Really if your going to get mad about calls, I would hope they were at least called

Click to expand...

The Raider coverage really irritated me in the lack of understanding regarding the lowering of the helmet as to why Michael was NOT called for a penalty. I could tell right away, but one of my biggest pet peeves is when announcers don't know the rules of the games they are covering. It's their job to know.

Click to expand...

Read my post again. It's about the Raider announcers. Not the refs. The refs got the call right... eventually.

I'm more worried about the Helmet to Helmet rule that seems to get called against us every game when, in fact, we're hitting shoulder to body.

I really think that that rule (and the "Lowering the helmet" rule) need to be challengeable just due to how many times this preseason and last regular season it got called against us (e.g., the big hit on Vernon Davis that knocked loose the ball last year).

ZLDRider":23c12nej said:

I'm more worried about the Helmet to Helmet rule that seems to get called against us every game when, in fact, we're hitting shoulder to body.

I really think that that rule (and the "Lowering the helmet" rule) need to be challengeable just due to how many times this preseason and last regular season it got called against us (e.g., the big hit on Vernon Davis that knocked loose the ball last year).

Click to expand...

:13:

This ends up extending opponent drives, which can affect the outcome of games. This should be reviewed by someone upstairs to confirm the helmet-to-helmet. It's a good rule, but the execution is very flawed and causing players to take out knees instead.

ZLDRider":26aukc7y said:

I'm more worried about the Helmet to Helmet rule that seems to get called against us every game when, in fact, we're hitting shoulder to body.

I really think that that rule (and the "Lowering the helmet" rule) need to be challengeable just due to how many times this preseason and last regular season it got called against us (e.g., the big hit on Vernon Davis that knocked loose the ball last year).

Click to expand...

The Cam to Davis hit was called a defenseless receiver penalty not helmet to helmet. However the are never defenseless they always have pads, at least that is my opinion.