+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: The Hit on Malone (/thread-13619.html)
RE: The Hit on Malone - bfine32 - 11-26-2017
Regardless, I gotta say Peppers would look good in stripes. Questionable call goes against him; he doesn't complain, he just tries to motivate himself. Then on the sidelines after the drive he's blaming himself. We should trade for him now before another team in the NFL realizes how good he is.
RE: The Hit on Malone - GreenDragon - 11-26-2017
Good call. He was defenseless especially with the CB holding his left arm back.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Weazzel80 - 11-26-2017
That was a bad call. Malone had the ball in his hands and took a couple steps. It worked out for us, but honestly; that was a horrible call in at a crucial part of the game. If it happened to us we would all be pretty pissed off right now.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Beaker - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 08:27 PM)Weazzel80 Wrote: That was a bad call. Malone had the ball in his hands and took a couple steps. I
Lofton kept saying Malone took 3 steps....he didn't even get the second one down after securing the ball before he took the hit.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Devils Advocate - 11-26-2017
I disagree with calling it ‘a hit on defenseless receiver’. Not sure how a defender is suppose to play if that’s the case. I do believe Peppers went helmet to helmet, so in the end it was a good call because it was a penalty- just the wrong one in my opinion.
RE: The Hit on Malone - michaelsean - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 08:27 PM)Weazzel80 Wrote: That was a bad call. Malone had the ball in his hands and took a couple steps. It worked out for us, but honestly; that was a horrible call in at a crucial part of the game. If it happened to us we would all be pretty pissed off right now.
Well then it’s a catch. Our ball at the 4.
RE: The Hit on Malone - michaelsean - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 08:39 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: I disagree with calling it ‘a hit on defenseless receiver’. Not sure how a defender is suppose to play if that’s the case. I do believe Peppers went helmet to helmet, so in the end it was a good call because it was a penalty- just the wrong one in my opinion.
Because the penalty of helmet to helmet is a penalty only when it involves a defenseless player. And it’s not really helmet to helmet. It’s any hit to the head or neck area or any hit leading with the crown.
RE: The Hit on Malone - HarleyDog - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:46 PM)CornerBlitz Wrote:
Does this look clean to you?
![[Image: DPlrn2lX0AImFbH.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPlrn2lX0AImFbH.jpg)
Whoa now? The initial hit was not on the chin. Therefore, you can’t hold it against the defender. We all seen the replay. The actual hit was clean.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Beaker - 11-26-2017
Malone was a p*ssy for not hanging on to that ball.
RE: The Hit on Malone - rfaulk34 - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:46 PM)CornerBlitz Wrote:
Does this look clean to you?
I'm convinced there are people in this world that wouldn't know their asshole from a hole in the ground if you put it in front of their face and put a sign on the dirt that said "this isn't your asshole".
RE: The Hit on Malone - hoosierbengal - 11-26-2017
If it is a helmet to the head dont they call that a personal foul? I am pretty sure I have seen the defenseless receiver penalty called even when the receiver isn't hit in the head. That is why I have been very confused by this rule.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Fan_in_Kettering - 11-26-2017
NFL Rules: Definition of Defenseless Receiver:
A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner. If the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player.
NFL Rules: Prohibited Contact
Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
Good call!
RE: The Hit on Malone - bengalhoel - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:39 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Looked clean to me. We just got a favorable call, although it was BS! If we are going to speak it when other teams get away with BS, you gotta speak it when we get away with BS!
Well I didnt like the call but the DB was holding Malone's arm the whole way so we actually lost yards if it was called correctly. Burfict's penalty was a worse call in my book.
RE: The Hit on Malone - michaelsean - 11-26-2017
Reading the Browns board a few guys posted the rule, but the mob ain’t having it. The guy who brought up the PI was ignored.
RE: The Hit on Malone - CincyKid - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:59 PM)bengal kitten uk Wrote: The worst bit was the argument by the announcer that because Malone had taken two steps he had completed the catch. Ok, we'll take the catch and fumble out of bounds, first down at the five. Or maybe the blatant pass interference, first down at the ten.
Crazy when all three scenarios have the same outcome and the announcers are quibbling over one of them being a marginal call
The correct call should have been completed pass and personal foul...........Bengals ball 1st down inside the 5.
Go back and watch the play.........Malone made an awesum one-handed catch and took 2 almost 3 steps before he was hit in the jaw.
Everyone got this call wrong
RE: The Hit on Malone - hoosierbengal - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 10:01 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: NFL Rules: Definition of Defenseless Receiver:
A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner. If the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player.
NFL Rules: Prohibited Contact
Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
Good call!
Thanks for posting this rule. I hadn't read the actual rule before.
RE: The Hit on Malone - Fan_in_Kettering - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 10:38 PM)hoosierbengal Wrote: Thanks for posting this rule. I hadn't read the actual rule before.
I hadn’t read it either and now that I have read it a few times the call makes sense to me. This “defenseless receiver” rule was updated in 2014 and I believe 2017.
RE: The Hit on Malone - bengalguy71 - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:59 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If you ask me the NFL got soft when it started making players wear facemasks. In my eyes the NFL has been dead for 50 years, or so.
Totally agree, I stopped following boxing when they stopped using bare knuckles and put the gloves on!!
RE: The Hit on Malone - michaelsean - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 11:04 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: Totally agree, I stopped following boxing when they stopped using bare knuckles and put the gloves on!!
Basically a pillow fight once they did that.
RE: The Hit on Malone - THE PISTONS - 11-26-2017
(11-26-2017, 07:52 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I don’t want too much of this stuff taken out of the game. I have no interest in watching flag football.
Yeah that's the thing. Or a QB sack that gets taken away because the guy hit the QB too low or too high.
Football is a fast game and it's hard to adjust hits sometimes.