NGT - Hip Drop Tackle MUST go

[Uni]

I will stop watching football if the NFL and NCAA does not penalize the hip drop tackle. Ravens lost Andrews on Thursday and the Florida State QB had his knee destroyed today.

It's such a dirty play with full intent to injure. I can't understand how all the leagues are waffling on this. As more and more tacklers use it, devastating ankle and knee injuries will mount.

It's ridiculous it's been allowed to go on for so long.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[JT39]

Disagree. Football is a tough sport and dangerous. And to limit what a defender can do will make the sport worse.

[T200]

Just go ahead make it full contact flag football. You can hit the other player but you can't take him down to the ground.

Of course, the only way a player is 'down' is if they go out of bounds or their flag is taken. A body part on the ground no longer ends the play. Could be interesting 🤔

[Uni]

Just go ahead make it full contact flag football. You can hit the other player but you can't take him down to the ground.

Of course, the only way a player is 'down' is if they go out of bounds or their flag is taken. A body part on the ground no longer ends the play. Could be interesting 🤔

What, nothing about players wearing dresses? I am always baffled that some people think any attempt at taking out techniques that injure other players is the next step to flag football. As if the high potential of injury and physical harm is such part in parcel with football as a blood sport. I don't watch football to see players intentionally injure other players.

That said, the hip drop tackle isn't some cherished part of tackling built into the fabric and traditions of the game. It's a technique that was introduced from the Rugby League a few years ago and is now gaining traction in the NFL and NCAA. It was outlawed in the Rugby League for... wait for it... causing too many leg injuries. The physics of the tackle make injury unavoidable. It's worse than the horse collar, and that was taken out. And just like the horse collar rule evolved from a specific set of actions of a more general pulling from the runner from behind, you don't have to define all the elements of the hip drop tackle - any tackle from behind where the tackler lands on the back of the legs would be a flag.

Again, this has been a recently learned technique. I don't ever remember seeing such widespread use of this type of tackle until recently. It's especially egregious when the tackler swings his legs toward the runner to ensure their full body weight lands on the other player, but it's not even worth defining the minutiae of the tackle. It can happen accidentally, especially out of desperation, but so do facemasks and horse collars. Making it a penalized offense will eliminate the egregious examples and stop tacklers from tackling in a manner where they inevitably land on the runners' legs. Yes, it's a fast and physical game. And it's never stopped the league from making it safer. Players will adapt.

Player safety is not flag football.

[T200]

What, nothing about players wearing dresses? I am always baffled that some people think any attempt at taking out techniques that injure other players is the next step to flag football. As if the high potential of injury and physical harm is such part in parcel with football as a blood sport. I don't watch football to see players intentionally injure other players.

That said, the hip drop tackle isn't some cherished part of tackling built into the fabric and traditions of the game. It's a technique that was introduced from the Rugby League a few years ago and is now gaining traction in the NFL and NCAA. It was outlawed in the Rugby League for... wait for it... causing too many leg injuries. The physics of the tackle make injury unavoidable. It's worse than the horse collar, and that was taken out. And just like the horse collar rule evolved from a specific set of actions of a more general pulling from the runner from behind, you don't have to define all the elements of the hip drop tackle - any tackle from behind where the tackler lands on the back of the legs would be a flag.

Again, this has been a recently learned technique. I don't ever remember seeing such widespread use of this type of tackle until recently. It's especially egregious when the tackler swings his legs toward the runner to ensure their full body weight lands on the other player, but it's not even worth defining the minutiae of the tackle. It can happen accidentally, especially out of desperation, but so do facemasks and horse collars. Making it a penalized offense will eliminate the egregious examples and stop tacklers from tackling in a manner where they inevitably land on the runners' legs. Yes, it's a fast and physical game. And it's never stopped the league from making it safer. Players will adapt.

Player safety is not flag football.

Not sure why you received my post the way that you did. Be that as it may...

I wasn't equating player safety to flag football. However, in the interest of player safety (which I am not against, BTW) fundamental changes are necessary if player safety is paramount. I juries are going to happen when 250+ pound men are routinely deliberately crashing and colliding into each other. No, the intent isn't to injure but it is bound to continue ue to happen.

How do you cut down on the injuries? You limit the amount of collisions allowed. Look at the changes to the kickoffs. Players are not getting any smaller or slower.

[Uni]

Not sure why you received my post the way that you did. Be that as it may...

I wasn't equating player safety to flag football. However, in the interest of player safety (which I am not against, BTW) fundamental changes are necessary if player safety is paramount. I juries are going to happen when 250+ pound men are routinely deliberately crashing and colliding into each other. No, the intent isn't to injure but it is bound to continue ue to happen.

How do you cut down on the injuries? You limit the amount of collisions allowed. Look at the changes to the kickoffs. Players are not getting any smaller or slower.

I don't see how a new tackling technique that causes injuries by design is chalked up to "it's just big fast guys running into each other". Especially when it's a specific, controllable way in which they run into each other.

And if you think players don't try to injure other players, you are quite naïve. Ever heard of bounty gate? Buddy Ryan? The dozens of techniques outlawed by the NFL for their propensity for injury?

[T200]

I don't see how a new tackling technique that causes injuries by design is chalked up to "it's just big fast guys running into each other". Especially when it's a specific, controllable way in which they run into each other.

And if you think players don't try to injure other players, you are quite naïve. Ever heard of bounty gate? Buddy Ryan? The dozens of techniques outlawed by the NFL for their propensity for injury?

You're going back quite some years. My position hasn't changed. I'm for player safety too. Not sure why I'm the target of your anger.

[MightyGiants]

The argument for has been laid out well.  The problem is it puts another big items on the plate of the overwhelmed officials.   Plus, it's a brand new term and it would need to be carefully defined.

[Ed Vette]

The League makes changes for safety and transforms over time. I can see a game one day that only allows wrap up tackles and the fans will still come. They don't come for the violence, they come for the competition.

As soon as a player gets a devastating injury from the Tush Push, that too will be on the table.