BOSTIC HIT,...LEGAL /ILLEGAL ,...

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Nakoma1, Aug 21, 2013.

?

BOSTIC's HIT WAS

Poll closed Sep 11, 2013.
  1. Nakoma1

    Nakoma1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    183
    Ratings:
    +183 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    Slice n dice it all yas want. The league is ripping the game apart ,... AND by those who never played the game ,.. Fans are more experienced than some of the jokers calling the shots at the League offices
    QUICK ,...Hurry up for those who disagree ,... post your contrary material.

    I don't care what the league hired him to do ,.. as for what Blandino does ,...he's nothing more than a glorified video geek ,... HE SURE screwed the pooch on this one

    But due continue to hug the man for his efforts here ,.. I guess some of yas still feel the need to grab onto sumtin ,

    ..sumtin that's so non-common-sensed now that Lovie is gone,... have at it
  2. short faced bear

    short faced bear Assistant Head Coach DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,478
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    Ratings:
    +1,280 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    230ß
    Why was hit against Dustin Keller not fined, but Jon Bostic’s hit was? NFL explains decisions
    By Frank Schwab | Shutdown Corner

    Dustin Keller's season and perhaps his career ended on a hit right on his knee by Houston safety D.J. Swearinger. Offensive players everywhere were outraged.

    Miami receiver Brian Hartline called the hit "crap." Atlanta tight end Tony Gonzalez went off on Swearinger during an interview with USA Today:

    "That was ridiculous on his part. It should be a fineable offense. That's just not part of football – hitting a defenseless player in his knee, that's something we all dread as players. That's my nightmare,'' Gonzalez told USA Today. "Hit me in my head (instead).

    "You never go at a guy's knee. Never."

    That hit wasn't fined. But a hit by Bears rookie linebacker Jon Bostic, which was hailed as a nice, hard hit against Chargers receiver Mike Willie drew a $21,000 fine. Bears coach Marc Trestman and linebacker Lance Briggs both publicly said they thought it was clean. Even Willie himself laughed it off and sounded surprised that there was any question the hit by Bostic on him was clean.

    "Oh no, he gave me a lick," Willie said the day after the game, before the fine came down. "It was a clean hit, I think."

    So why did the NFL fine Bostic about five percent of his base pay this season while Swearinger didn't get any reprimand at all? The NFL explained its decisions, not that the reasoning will appease everyone.


    NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino explained to the NFL Network that both decisions were based on how the defensive player delivered the blow, not where they delivered the blow.

    Swearinger did not use the crown of his helmet.

    "(A defenseless receiver) is protected in two ways: He's protected from hits to the head or neck area, and to hits to the body with the crown or forehead/hairline parts of the helmet," Blandino said. "Those rules do not prohibit low contact like you see in the hit here."

    Blandino said it was an "unfortunate result," and the NFL's competition committee would review that play this offseason.

    Bostic's hit looked fine because he didn't hit Willie in the head, but Bostic used the crown of his helmet on a defenseless receiver. That led to the fine.

    "The Bostic hit is illegal because he used the crown of his helmet to deliver a forceable blow to the body of the receiver," Blandino said. "For this hit to be legal he has to get the helmet to the side and use the shoulder to deliver the blow, or hit the receiver with his head up. Those are the two techniques we're trying to get back in the game."

    So the next time you're arguing if a hit was legal or not, look at how the defensive player delivered the hit, not just where he hits the offensive player. The league is looking at both.

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...st-dustin-keller-not-fined-jon-140505413.html
  3. short faced bear

    short faced bear Assistant Head Coach DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,478
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    Ratings:
    +1,280 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    230ß
    Well hell if your gonna use that shoulder...



    Hardy Brown
    • Like Like x 1
  4. CBears

    CBears Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    • Like Like x 1
  5. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    [​IMG][​IMG]
    Windy City Gridiron - Being who you thought we were since 2005!


    NFL hypocrisy hits the Chicago Bears with Jon Bostic fine
    By Kev H@Kev_WCG on Aug 21 2013, 10:57a 129

    [​IMG] <img
    Bostic isn't smiling today as he's hit with a $21,000 fine for a hit last week. - Dennis Wierzbicki-USA TODAY Spor

    The NFL penalty machine has cranked out another one as the NFL has fined rookie linebacker Jon Bostic $21,000 for a hit on a defenseless receiver that didn't look that defenseless. The worst part? Just days ago the league was celebrating that as a spectacular hit.

    Hey, let's look at this together:
    [​IMG]
    That's the hit that Jon Bostic put on Willis in the Chargers-Bears game last Thursday. This hit led to the announcement today that Jon Bostic, who has yet to receive a game check, was fined $21,000, particularly incensing Lance Briggs:
    The problem? When it happened, everyone thought it was a good clean football play. The announcers go nuts, folks on twitter went nuts, the community here went nuts.
    So comes the story that the NFL is hypocritical. This CBS Sports article shows how the NFL has scrubbed it's use of the word "spectacular" to describe the hit, in the wake of the fine:
    Now here's the weird part of the story, the NFL has a clip of Bostic's hit on the league's official website and in the caption below the clip, the hit is referred to as a 'spectacular' one. The NFL also used the word spectacular in the headline.
    Of course, as soon as the fine was announced, Twitter pointed out the hypocrisy of calling a hit spectacular, but then still fining the player for said hit. At that point the NFL changed the caption and the headline faster than the
    NCAA store scrubbed player names from its search engine.
    Naturally, other people on twitter, notably former players/analysts had a problem with that. Per Zach Zaidman, this is what sources tell him was the ruling put into effect:

    Zach Zaidman ✔ @ZachZaidman

    Two league sources say Jon Bostic was fined for violating NFL Rule 12, Section 2, Article 7 (b) (2): Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/"hairline" parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player's body...
    9:29 AM - 21 Aug 2013
    And the beloved Bowen:

    Matt Bowen @MattBowen41
    Handing out a $21k fine to #Bears LB Jon Bostic is ridiculous...That's a clean, hard tackle from my perspective.

    Here's the NFL's problem--they can't have their cake and eat it too.
    They can't celebrate the big hits of the NFL - which are part of the game -- and then hem and haw about safety when they decide that they need to make sure the image on concussions is consistent.
    Look at that gif again--he takes multiple steps and advances the ball--how defenseless can he be?

    One of the most important courts for the NFL is the court of public opinion - tell us what you think?
    Poll:
    Was the Bostic hit on Willis a clean football play?
    • 89% Defintely Yes (1215 votes)
    • 6% Definitely No (82 votes)
    • 5% Borderline (66 votes)
    1363 votes total
    • Like Like x 1
  6. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    Well the poll over at WCG includes a larger sampling than ours so I'll call it slightly more valid. Only 6% (82) of the 1363 respondents saw it as an illegal hit. Of that 82 people 22 were devout Charger fans and the other 60 each received a $500 check for the NFL for casting a NO vote. :p (Just kidding). So those of you who actually believe it was; an illegal hit with parts of the helmet on a "defenseless player", which is what it's being called (So let's not be calling it something else OK?) are either blind, brain dead or simply a bunch of weenies who polls would show will always pick the wrong answer even if the question was "December 25th is Christmas Day", YES or NO!

    First of all a player in possession of the ball (having caught it, tucked it away, and made at least one if not two strides upfield if you watch closely) CANNOT IN ANY WAY BE CALLED A "DEFENSELESS PLAYER". Once he accomplished those three things he became a "Ball Carrier" and THERE IS NOT RULE LIMITING HOW HARD YOU CAN TACKLE ONE OF THOSE! In fact the whole idea is to hit them as f'n hard as you can and separate them from the ball which is exactly what he did and IF they play had been reviewed, AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, THEN IT ALSO SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALLED A FUMBLE AND NOT AN INCOMPLETION.

    So chalk up one black mark against the officials for poor officiating and another against Roger Goddell and his bunch of panty waist helmet hit police for pure hypocrisy. Praise the hit? YES, but ahhh, erm, oh shoot, we are gonna have to fine you for it Mr. Bostic, sorry. (But ummm, it was a hell of a hit. wink wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean). It is too much to expect that Roger Goodell will get mowed down by a run away taxi cab or become the only victim of a terrorist attack? :voodoo:

    And as to that other part of the definition about a "part of the helmet" all I can say is this. IT'S A PART OF THEIR GEAR AND PRETTY DAMN HARD TO KEEP IT FROM COMING IN CONTACT WITH ANOTHER PLAYER". Jeezus if that's the issue let's take their helmets away and make them were stocking caps with their team logos. I have one with a Bears logo I'd be happy to loan them as a prototype. You can't avoid some helmet to helmet on virtually every tackle that's made. In this case he lowered his should to hit the guy and when you do that your shoulder comes up and your head tucks in toward your shoulder to protect you from getting a broken neck! Maybe the 4 of you who voted ILLIEGAL in our poll should give that a try and maybe you'd see what I mean.

    This was without a doubt the most ridiculous decision I've seen yet out the No Fun League office. These guys are so bent on simply finding examples of illegal hits so that the NFL can prove it's doing it's job that if they can't find one each week they'll simply take the best example that's closest to it and use than one. They're a complete bunch of morons.

    And one more thing. This has nothing to do with the lawsuit by former NFL Players as at least one person has stated. The plaintiffs are not complaining the NFL didn't protect them from vicious hits! They're complaining that they were allowed to, nay encouraged, to play concussed and that the NFL knew all along the dangers of playing with a concussion yet turned a blind eye to it. NOBODY IS SUING ANYBODY BECAUSE DICK BUTKUS PRACTICALLY TORE THEIR HEAD OFF. :rolleyes:
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Nakoma1

    Nakoma1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    183
    Ratings:
    +183 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    PLUS 1

    yeah them go with the flow anyway the wind blows type,...they really crack me up with their rules are are rules LMFAO


    Nail on the head Soul ! ! wherez da high fives when ya need one ??
    especially the defenseless posture part

    Willey was in no way defenseless
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page