Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Should a Hit Like Whitner's Be Legal? - NYTimes.com

A Fifth Down reader, RM from Honolulu, sent this comment after the 49ers-Saints game:

The hit on Pierre Thomas by Whitner was CLEARLY an intentional helmet-to-helmet hit on a defenseless receiver with vicious intent. It was a penalty and deserves fines, not praise. Why haven?t any of the analysts and so-called experts pointed this out? This was THE pivotal play in the game because it took out a key component of the Saints? offense and it has been hailed as such, but it should have been a penalty. What is worse, however, is that it seriously injured Pierre Thomas.

The N.F.L. later explained that Thomas was not a defenseless receiver, that he had enough time after the catch to establish himself as a runner. You can find the full explanation in this Associated Press article:

Helmet-to-helmet hits are banned against defenseless players in eight categories, and a runner is not one of those categories. Thomas was considered a runner because he?d made a catch, turned and made a ?football move? before being hit.

Josh Levin, writing for Slate, said the brutality of the blow escaped Kenny Albert and Daryl Johnston on Fox:

Because the hit was legal, the football-is-terrifying-and-dangerous response never got triggered in the announcers? brains. Even after scrutinizing the play in slow motion and high definition, Johnston and Albert either missed or chose to ignore that Pierre Thomas dropped the ball because he was so badly injured that he lost control of his limbs.

On Sunday,?Thomas wrote on his Facebook page: ?Hey fans, just to let everyone know?I?m doing great?it was a nasty hit but this is the sport we play, can?t do anything about it but move forward from here.?

As Jonah Lehrer?wrote for Grantland.com,?if football ever dies, it won?t come from anyone inside the game, like Roger Goodell or even Pierre Thomas. Instead, he wrote: ?The death will start with those furthest from the paychecks, the unpaid high school athletes playing on Friday nights. It will begin with nervous parents reading about brain trauma, with doctors warning about the physics of soft tissue smashing into hard bone, with coaches forced to bench stars for an entire season because of a single concussion.?

What are the odds that?a hit like Donte Whitner?s ?will be penalized in 10 years or 5 or even sooner? Highly likely. It?s not alarmist to think that someone could die or be paralyzed before a national TV audience on that kind of blow. The hit was similar to Ryan Clark?s head smash against Willis McGahee in a Steelers-Ravens playoff game in 2009. (Like the 49ers, the Steelers recovered a fumble after the running back ? McGahee ?was concussed.)

With all that we know now ? and that the N.F.L. should know ? it seems reasonable to offer more protection to players. Thomas and McGahee had some time to brace themselves after a catch, but if you watch in real time, not that much time. There are also situations in which a runner is in a vulnerable position, after being spun around, for example, and not able to prepare for a vicious, but perfectly legal, helmet-to-helmet strike. It?s no wonder the N.F.L. is being sued by multiple sets of former players.

Bottom line, ?Whitner?s hit was legal, but why would a mother and father want their son to play a sport in which that was true?

Source: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/should-a-hit-like-whitners-be-legal/

hanley ramirez blago mumia abu jamal mumia abu jamal pearl harbor alec baldwin alec baldwin

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.