The difference between Shazier's & Burfict's hits

[BigNastyDefense]

Difference between hits

A lot of people have been talking about how Burfict's hit on Antonio Brown was a foul but the hit that Ryan Shazier put on Bengal's RB Giovanni Bernard wasn't but should have been.

First and foremost, intent.

Shazier hit a guy who had caught a pass, taken two steps, and therefore transitioned himself from "defenseless receiver" to "runner." As a runner, you're no longer considered defenseless.

Burfict hit a player who was in the air, and the ball was already overthrown and past Brown when Burfict came in AIMING FOR BROWN'S HEAD/NECK. Brown was defenseless, and didn't have the ball, there was no football play to be made there by Burfict when he came in and made the hit.

On Shazier's hit on Bernard, Shazier hit him as he turned around. When Bernard turned around and saw Shazier flying towards him, he voluntarily lowered his pad level to brace for the hit. Shazier had his head lowered as he ran, and the bracing for the hit is what put Bernard's helmet in range to get contact. As a runner, a helmet to helmet hit is not a penalty. And if Bernard doesn't drop his pad level, contact isn't made with the crown of Shazier's helmet. I'm pretty sure for a tackle to be considered a "spear," the contact with the crown of the helmet isn't incidental but instead intentional. Otherwise many more tackles would be considered spears.

Burfict's hit, like I said before, Brown didn't have the ball and he wasn't considered a runner either. Burfict made NO ATTEMPT to avoid hitting a defenseless Brown, and instead lowered his shoulder to make impact with Brown's head/neck area as fast and hard as he possibly could.

Also, when it comes to a blindside hit, a "crack back" block and a hit on the player with the ball which is considered a tackle are two different things. They revised the rule on crack back blocks after Hines Ward broke the jaw of a former Bengal's player on a vicious block. When you have the ball, you have to expect to be tackled and it doesn't have to be from in front where you can see it, otherwise a blindside hit on a QB with the ball would be a foul.

[BnG_Hevn]

You can't measure / gauge intent. The ONLY person who knows Burfict's intent is Burfect himself.

Now, does it LOOK intentional? Yes. Could he have avoided it? Well,*I'm not an NFL player but it seems to me that "the most gifted athletes in the world" should be able to throw is body in another direction to avoid that collision. If he was going "into" Brown that is different, but even walking around a corner, a normal person can instinctively avoid a person coming around the same corner from opposite direction.

I think Sanders is full of it. Tomlinson should have said "What, as a defender you can't redirect yourself to the left"? If Burfect throws himself to the left and still hits Brown, do be it.

[tube517]

Pee-on is a clown. I couldn't sleep after the game and was flipping channels and he was rambling on w/his usual shit. I wasted 5 minutes I can't get back.

[fansince'76]

The difference was and is plainly and abundantly evident to anyone who isn't a bitter Steelers hater and/or a complete moron.

[SteelerFanInStl]

People are idiots if they can't see the difference between the two hits and that's even without taking into account the history of the two players.

[salamander]

There's an article on espn saying that Pacman Jones was saying that AB was faking it and even went so far as to say that AB "winked" at him. I can post the link later if someone else doesn't beforehand.

[Mojouw]

It doesn't help that tons of folks out there are criticizing the Shazier hit not because it is illegal but because it should be illegal. In other words, no one is reading things in detail and non-NFL people are howling about the Shazier hit because it is violent.

Best takes I am reading are that it is impossible to legislate the violence out of the NFL and even with an interest in player safety, it is fundamentally an unsafe league.

Point is, Burfict hit is illegal - Shazier hit is legal, but borderline.

[steelreserve]

Shazier is a regular player who was trying to make a play. Burfict fucks his own mother. That's about as in-depth as you need to analyze that one.

[BigNastyDefense]

It doesn't help that tons of folks out there are criticizing the Shazier hit not because it is illegal but because it should be illegal. In other words, no one is reading things in detail and non-NFL people are howling about the Shazier hit because it is violent.

Best takes I am reading are that it is impossible to legislate the violence out of the NFL and even with an interest in player safety, it is fundamentally an unsafe league.

Point is, Burfict hit is illegal - Shazier hit is legal, but borderline.

Exactly. NFL football isn't a contact sport. NFL football isn't even a collision sport. NFL football is a VIOLENT collision sport. You can try all you want to "legislate" the violence out, but you can't. Today players are bigger, stronger, and faster than they were even 10 years ago.

The difference is that the hit Shazier put on Bernard was a violent collision on a football play between two large men running. In that instance, shit happens and I was glad to see Bernard get up and walk away, and I hope he's okay and doesn't have major after effects from that hit.

Burfict didn't lower his shoulder to take out Brown until after the ball was overthrown and unable to be caught, which makes the hit a non-football play and simply put, full of malice. It was an attempt to maim, and anyone who disagrees is either a complete Bengals homer or a moron (and that includes James Harrison).

[ALLD]

You would think the other players in the league would step up about one of their own trying to take out a brother. Lewis is full of crap and trying for damage control on television right now. I'm not buying what he's selling. He let his goons run wild all season and got what they deserved. The Bengals are going to be a marked team besides being snake bit.

Compared to the Saints' scandal, the Bengals should be forced to change ownership and fire the entire coaching staff.

- - - Updated - - -

You would think the other players in the league would step up about one of their own trying to take out a brother. Lewis is full of crap and trying for damage control on television right now. I'm not buying what he's selling. He let his goons run wild all season and got what they deserved. The Bengals are going to be a marked team besides being snake bit.

Compared to the Saints' scandal, the Bengals should be forced to change ownership and fire the entire coaching staff.

[fansince'76]

It was an attempt to maim, and anyone who disagrees is either a complete Bengals homer or a moron (and that includes James Harrison).

Or a butthurt emo mangina still bleeding all over their feminine napkin about a SB from 10 years ago with an axe to grind...


You do know why that happened right? The uncalled spear on Geno which tomlin had the audacity to challenge for the fumble. I would have been pissed as well.

"Spearing." :rolleyes:


That is also the exact moment the refs lost control when they didn't flag that or the dancing at mid field when Geno was still on the ground.

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121616&start=250#p1802943

Oh, you mean the same way they flagged Birth Defect for celebrating after he shredded Bell's knee? And it isn't like Birth Defect has a history of cheap shots or anything, unlike Shazier. :coffee:

I REALLY wish the Vikes would have ended their season yesterday...

[silver & black]

I still think the hit should have drawn a flag. I DO NOT think the hit was dirty or intentional. I've watched it several times and Shazier leads with his helmet. I know Bernard was a runner at the time of the hit, but it is my understanding that even if it was not intentional, helmet to helmet is a penalty. If I'm wrong in my understanding of the rule.... if anyone understands it, please educate me.

By the way.... being a die hard Buckeyes fan, I'm a big fan of Shazier!

[stillers4me]

So What?? These delusional Bengals fans think a flag on that play fixes everything.

YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID.

[st33lersguy]

Hitting a ball-carrier and hitting a receiver after the ball is past him are obviously 2 different things, but don't tell that to moron Bungals fans and Steelers haters

[steelreserve]

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121616&start=250#p1802943


Why do you read that shit? Just to piss yourself off? As a cautionary example? We all know those people are stupid as hell.

[fansince'76]

Why do you read that shit? Just to piss yourself off? As a cautionary example? We all know those people are stupid as hell.

The severe butthurt is actually amusing. It's really funny when they start pissing and moaning about "East Coast bias." :chuckle:

[ETL]

Lot of stupid talking heads out there trying to be the "defender" of the weak or the contrarian.

These idiots like Eisen and Sanders are out to make a name for themselves - that's all. They are just media parasites - feasting on misery when it exists

[KeiselPower99]

I think Burfict is guilty of the James Harrison syndrome. He doesn't do things to help his cause and when a hit that violent happens your going to get flagged every time

[Steelman]

I think Burfict is guilty of the James Harrison syndrome. He doesn't do things to help his cause and when a hit that violent happens your going to get flagged every time

But James Harrison isn't clinically insane. Burfict needs psychiatric help.

[tube517]

Lot of stupid talking heads out there trying to be the "defender" of the weak or the contrarian.

These idiots like Eisen and Sanders are out to make a name for themselves - that's all. They are just media parasites - feasting on misery when it exists

Well, Eisen is Marsha's biggest lover.

Sanders played for the Crygirls, a team and bandwagon fanbase that hates Pittsburgh.

Both work for the NFLN which is run by Bobby Kraftgate**

[fansince'76]

But James Harrison isn't clinically insane. Burfict needs psychiatric help.

Harrison has also never taken cheap shots completely away from the play either...

[86WARD]

Burfict and Harrison shouldn't be in the same sentence...lol.

[hawaiiansteeler]

Steelers ILB Ryan Shazier not fined for hit on Bengals RB Giovani Bernard

By Jeff.Hartman on Jan 14, 2016

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6pxG7D34xI4uGeZ6Y0XCbXFaFFM=/0x0:2166x1444/1310x873/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/48566721/usa-today-9048094.0.jpg

The controversial hit on the Bengals RB ignited the tension between the two AFC North rivals, and will certainly have Cincinnati fans upset as they learn Shazier will not be fined by the NFL the helmet-to-helmet hit.

If you think back to the Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Cincinnati Bengals AFC Wild Card game last Saturday night, before Ryan Shazier delivered a hit on Giovani Bernard which gave the running back a concussion, it was business as usual. There was the normal Pittsburgh vs. Cincinnati jawing and pushing and shoving, but nothing was abnormal until the hit which caused a fumble was delivered and not flagged.

Paul Brown Stadium went into a frenzy and from there the game went from intense to insane with a rabid energy between the two teams. As things finally start to die down between the two fan bases, the news of Shazier not being fined for the hit will certainly raise some eyebrows in Cincinnati.

Regardless of your feelings towards the play, Shazier brings up a valid point. When you have grown men running at the speeds they are, it is difficult to always hit a player in the strike zone, not to mention a player as small as Bernard. Nonetheless, although he still could get news from the league office of a fine, it looks as if Shazier's play was deemed clean, which will certainly ignite another round of hatred from Bengals fans.

http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/nfl-pittsburgh-steelers-news/2016/1/14/10772124/steelers-ilb-ryan-shazier-not-fined-for-hit-on-bengals-rb-giovani

[Craic]

Steelers ILB Ryan Shazier not fined for hit on Bengals RB Giovani Bernard

That's a pretty inaccurate picture, however, to post on that story. Shazier clearly hits Bernard in the helmet with the crown of his helmet. There's no doubt about that. It's the fact that he was a runner, rather than a defenseless player at that point that makes it legal.

[SteelerFanInStl]

That's a pretty inaccurate picture, however, to post on that story. Shazier clearly hits Bernard in the helmet with the crown of his helmet. There's no doubt about that. It's the fact that he was a runner, rather than a defenseless player at that point that makes it legal.

That's not correct. According to the NFL rules, hitting any player with the crown of your helmet outside of the tackle box is deemed to be a penalty. This rule was put into effect to protect both the ball carrier and the tackler.

[86WARD]

The hit was illegal.


ARTICLE 8. INITIATING CONTACT WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET. It is a foul if a runner or tackler initiates forcible contact by delivering a blow with the top/crown of his helmet against an opponent when both players are clearly outside the tackle box (an area extending from tackle to tackle and from three yards beyond the line of scrimmage to the offensive team’s end line). Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or tackler against an opponent shall not be a foul.

But I won't complain...

[86WARD]

Here's a better picture:

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160115/f7e9d7cf2219bce17b0a01919484df4c.jpg

[zulater]

We probably would have been better off if Shazier had been penalized on that hit. If they get the resulting first down from the penalty the Bengals likely score a fg or TD on that possession. So it's ether 15-3 or 15-7 and they're kicking off to us. At the time our offense was in a decent groove. And in my opinion the lack of a call caused the refs to go "make up call" after we were given the fumble, in other words the game circumstances that saw Ben get hurt were greatly aided by the resulting field position after the refs called Foster for holding.

Of course truthfully if that Shazier hit-fumble is actually called properly the Steelers should have been awarded the td and would have gone up 22-0 pending the x-tra point. You never hear that brought up though for some reason?

Anyway as far as the difference in the hits. The Bengal rb changed his head level prior to contact. You can say well Shazier shouldn't have launched, but defensive players do all the time. I don;t think he meant to hit head first. I think the intent was to go shoulder first, but the ever changing nature of two forces coming together in separate directions with separate causes saw to it otherwise.

As far as Burfict's hit on Brown. From the one angle it appears rather obvious that Burfict had a perfect angle to see how the play developed in real time. He doesn't even make a move towards AB until after the ball had sailed harmlessly incomplete. In my opinion he sees the play is over, but decides he has to send a statement to the Steelers all the same. In other words in my opinion the evidence is compelling that Burfict's actions were calculated, were selfish, and were meant to inflict damage.

Say what you want about Shazier's hit. Perhaps there was an element of carelessness to it? ( I don't believe so, I think he was just measuring up a ball carrier) But there's nothing about that play or Shazier's history that even hints at malicious intent.

I mean really, the Steelers go into Denver with their three best offensive players either out (Bell)or severely compromised (Ben and AB) due to "borderline" or malicious hits by one player and one player only. Think that's a coincidence? Or do you believe as I do that this is a man who targets specific players with the idea of taking them out? Cam Newton, Greg Olsen, think those ankle twists weren't meant to hurt or limit them? This guy should be compelled to undergo professional evaluation and council before taking an NFL field again!

[teegre]

Was Shazier's hit legal or not? Eh. Let us assume that it was not.

The difference between the Shazier hit and the Butfict hit (on AB) comes down to this:

Shazier was making a tackle; Burfict was not.

Legal or not, Shazier was hitting a player who possessed the ball; ergo, Shazier was in the process of making a tackle. The player whom Burfict hit did not possess the ball; hence, Burfict was hitting AB just to hit him.

[86WARD]

By rule, the hit should be ruled illegal. I don't think there was an ounce of malicious intent on Shaziers part. Not one. I think he was just going for a football hit. He lowered his head, a no-no, but it happens on occasion when making a tackle. We see it multiple times every week. Like Zu said, the intent wasn't there, so maybe that's what the rules committee viewed? No reason to go into Burfict...over that asshole.

[tube517]

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2016/01/shazier-hit-on-bernard-still-deemed-legal-by-several-analysts/

As explained by Pereira this is a complicated rule.

[fansince'76]

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2016/01/shazier-hit-on-bernard-still-deemed-legal-by-several-analysts/

As explained by Pereira this is a complicated rule.

PEREIRA'S ON DA STEALERS PAYROLE! :jerkit:

[tube517]

PEREIRA'S ON DA STEALERS PAYROLE! :jerkit:

http://binscorner.com/mails/c/cute-hippo-pictures/126687107206.jpg

[tube517]

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2016/01/dean-blandino-explains-why-saturday-night-hit-by-steelers-lb-ryan-shazier-was-legal/

[zulater]

As Shazier's hit was ruled legal that means without question the Steelers got screwed out of a TD by a premature whistle. The Steelers should have in fact been up 21-0 pending the xp attempt. The way Boswell was kicking off had the game been officiated properly that play the Bengals most likely take possession at or around their own 20 for the final minute of the 3rd qrt down 22-0 with absolutely zero momentum. And the Steelers would have had a healthy Ben to preserve a near insurmountable lead and probably go into Denver with a healthy roster mostly.

So the next time you see a Bungle fan crying they was robbed because their two morons were correctly assessed 30 yards of penalties point this out to them. We were robbed earlier and worse.

[fansince'76]

http://binscorner.com/mails/c/cute-hippo-pictures/126687107206.jpg

(fart)

:lol:

[ETL]

Apparently Jeremy Hill is not upset about the hit but what happened afterwards

"It really wasn't the hit," Hill said after the game. "I was just more upset with seeing [Bernard] on the ground that they were still trying to celebrate. That just rubbed me the wrong way.

hmm. I don't know if he's kidding or if he's really that stupid. Or if he thinks Burfict celebrating is ok because he regularly provides Hill with sexual favors.