The hyde hit

[Meatloaf63]

5 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Boy you fans have rose coloured glasses......

 

It was a penalty no ifs ands or buts and if that happened to a Bill you'd be screaming suspension.  

 

You can hear the helmets hit!!!

 

Now conversely one can argue it saved the Bills 7 yards, knocked out a receiver and momentum.

 

 

Yes these helmets are banging👍

[TigerJ]

1 hour ago, Real McNasty said:

And when a playoff game is on the line for the Bills and say this happens would you be happy with the call?

I believe it is possible to play hard and play clean at the same time.  If I see a play where the Bills player is playing hard and clean, and hurts a guy, then gets called for a penalty, then I'm mad at the official.  When a player is being edgy and gets called for a penalty,  I'll be irritated at the player for giving the official an excuse to call it.

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

1 hour ago, Real McNasty said:

And when a playoff game is on the line for the Bills and say this happens would you be happy with the call?

No, I would be patching dry wall because of a call like that in the playoffs. 

[Ta111]

5 hours ago, NoSaint said:

a shoulder to the head/neck area is still a penalty. It’s not just helmet to helmet contact. Your photo is the definitive shot of it actually being a penalty.

But you also have to keep in mind the receiver is bending down with the ball. If he was in an upright position it would have been all chest. Hyde actually bends down in an effort to hit him lower but the receiver bends down at the same time. Not a good call in my opinion.

[NoSaint]

34 minutes ago, Ta111 said:

But you also have to keep in mind the receiver is bending down with the ball. If he was in an upright position it would have been all chest. Hyde actually bends down in an effort to hit him lower but the receiver bends down at the same time. Not a good call in my opinion.

that doesn’t make a difference here though. 

[DrDawkinstein]

47 minutes ago, Ta111 said:

But you also have to keep in mind the receiver is bending down with the ball. If he was in an upright position it would have been all chest. Hyde actually bends down in an effort to hit him lower but the receiver bends down at the same time. Not a good call in my opinion.

 

No he really doesnt. He never gets anywhere close the correct breakdown stance of proper tackling technique.

 

He dips his shoulder a bit, but is still running straight up.

 

That's a flag.

[Teddy KGB]

2 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Late to the thread, and yall wont like hearing it, but it was a penalty and not a great hit.

 

"Eyes through the Thighs" is how you properly tackle. Hyde had the time and room to line him up correctly with proper technique but chose not to. So he gets the flag.

 

You cant launch your shoulder into a guys chin. Just cant do it.

 

Defenders, especially Safeties, should be well aware of the league trying to get rid of this human-missile, poor form, dangerous tackling technique. He could have had a big hit there legally too. That's on Hyde.

perrimans chin is on his chest ? 

[DrDawkinstein]

56 minutes ago, TigerJ said:

I believe it is possible to play hard and play clean at the same time.  If I see a play where the Bills player is playing hard and clean, and hurts a guy, then gets called for a penalty, then I'm mad at the official.  When a player is being edgy and gets called for a penalty,  I'll be irritated at the player for giving the official an excuse to call it.

 

Absolutely.

 

And these Professionals really have no excuses. I only have 8 years of little loop and high school experience, and a couple years playing Rugby, and somehow know far better tackling technique than they do.

 

It's sad that they are more concerned with making it "look cool" than actually doing it properly (and therefore, safely). The crazy part is, they can still have HUGE, awesome looking hits on the highlight reel by doing it right and driving through the guy. It also saves them from the embarrassment when the ball carrier bounces off their shoulder hit and keeps going down the field.

[muppy]

all my thoughts have been expressed in this thread already so to summarize my thoughts cohesively"

 

1. Yes it was a penalty based on the part of the rule regarding "defenseless receiver" and that he lead with his shoulder and not his helmet isn't the point.

2. Did I like the call at the time? NOPE. I thought it was a clean hard hit and since he didn't lead with his helmet thought there was no foul committed.

3. Could Hyde have lowered his angle of hit to go lower? Maybe but these are live play conditions and his intent was NOT to injure.

4. Would I feel the same way if a Bills receiver was hit that way and No penalty called? Of course Im biased but would like to think Id still think of it as questionable.

 

I think this "defenseless receiver" penalty is in itself questionable. No Im NOT for players being injured but calls like we saw yesterday I think are borderline at best. Lets see how many receivers begin to take dives in hopes of drawing such a call if the ball is dislodged during a tackle and then we can discuss this further.

 

The pussification of NFL football? An attempt to protect players? Both. It is what it is.

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, Teddy KGB said:

perrimans chin is on his chest ? 

 

Scroll up 7 posts. His shoulder is into the bottom of his facemask.

[BuffalOhio]

It was the correct call.  I just don't know what the DB is supposed to do differently there.  Let him catch it?

 

Here's a name for y'all: Daryl Stingley.

 

There's a reason they have to protect receivers.

[MJS]

Really fun hit to watch, though. Hyde came in like a missile.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

It was the correct call.  Intent has nothing to do with the penalty.  

[Matt_In_NH]

I find fans reactions to these plays fascinating.  I wish there was an alternate reality where we could see the exact same play except the roles are reversed.  Diggs playing the roll of Perriman and a Jets safety delivering the blow and then putting the forum reaction of both side by side.  I dont doubt for a second the opinions would be a complete 180.

[NoSaint]

4 hours ago, Muppy said:

all my thoughts have been expressed in this thread already so to summarize my thoughts cohesively"

 

1. Yes it was a penalty based on the part of the rule regarding "defenseless receiver" and that he lead with his shoulder and not his helmet isn't the point.

2. Did I like the call at the time? NOPE. I thought it was a clean hard hit and since he didn't lead with his helmet thought there was no foul committed.

3. Could Hyde have lowered his angle of hit to go lower? Maybe but these are live play conditions and his intent was NOT to injure.

4. Would I feel the same way if a Bills receiver was hit that way and No penalty called? Of course Im biased but would like to think Id still think of it as questionable.

 

I think this "defenseless receiver" penalty is in itself questionable. No Im NOT for players being injured but calls like we saw yesterday I think are borderline at best. Lets see how many receivers begin to take dives in hopes of drawing such a call if the ball is dislodged during a tackle and then we can discuss this further.

 

The pussification of NFL football? An attempt to protect players? Both. It is what it is.

it’s been the rule for awhile and not really been gamed by receivers 

[muppy]

18 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

it’s been the rule for awhile and not really been gamed by receivers 

good to know thanks. I hate divers.

[Markaf431]

Anyone talking about the poor tackling think maybe Hyde hit him that way on purpose? Trying to force the incompletion instead of giving up the catch which was going to be more yards than the penalty? Unless I’m wrong it’s not a spot foul penalty so the incompletion takes the 15 from the original LOS.