phan420 0 Posted January 21, 2009 Not spearing He turned his head (although very slightly, he still did it) before contact He did not leave his feet prior to making the hit Legal hit, nothing wrong with this tackle. (everyone else was chiming in, I didn't want to miss out) .02 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter34 3 Posted January 21, 2009 I saw a replay of the hit and sorry tj, but I dont see it as illegal. He came at him on a 45 degree angle, not a direct head first missile type motion. Hard, brutal hit, but it was just as much the shoulder first as it was the helmet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted January 21, 2009 I saw a replay of the hit and sorry tj, but I dont see it as illegal. He came at him on a 45 degree angle, not a direct head first missile type motion. Hard, brutal hit, but it was just as much the shoulder first as it was the helmet. Hitting a guy at a 45 degree angle like Clark did generates more power than hitting a guy from a parallel to the ground position. The key thing in terms of Clark's body positioning is that his body and head were lined up straight all player's momentum and power coming straight through the head. That's what makes it so dangerous. There was shoulder impact right after the helmet impact, which probably saved the damage from being worse, but to say it was just as much the shoulder first as it was the helmet is incorrect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted January 21, 2009 Not spearingHe turned his head (although very slightly, he still did it) before contact He did not leave his feet prior to making the hit Wrong on the first two counts, missing the point on the third. The fact that he left his feet after contact rather than before actually means he launched himself with more power behind the hit. Whether or not he left his feet before the hit is really not relevant in terms of the legality or dangerousness of the hit, so there's no point citing it as a defense of the hit, as many have tried to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Law 220 Posted January 21, 2009 Wow! The levels of ignorance, arguing facts clearly not in evidence, and even creating whole new "facts" out of thin air as suits ones "argument" has reached all new levels in this thread. The stupidity and just plain stubborness in the face of the mountain of actual fact and reality is staggering. There's being pig-headed and then there are the few in this thread. Truly amazing, if not embarrassing. I would imagine these would be the same people who argue the world revolves around the sun and not vice versa, that the world is flat and not round, that we did not land on the moon, that pork is not the other white meat, or even that the Lions aren't the worst team in the NFL. These people argue just to argue. They relish in being wrong as long as they are opposite the overwhelming majority. The greater the odds of their minority the better, as long as they have something to rail against, something to "prove" just how much a rebel and trendsetter they really are. No matter how wrong, stupid, and ignorant they are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lambert58 56 Posted January 21, 2009 Here is exactly how it happened based off of the film: Frame 161, McGahee stops running as he hears something. Heap's head turns slightly to the right. Frame 193, the second arm hits McGahee in the throat from the front. Frame 225, McGahee emerging from behind the linebacker, you can see that he's obviously been hit, raising his arms to his throat. The third hit, frame 232, takes McGahee in the back pulling him downward and forward. Heap you'll notice shows no signs at all of being hit. He is visibly holding his helmet, which is impossiable if his wrist has been shattered. Heap is turning here now, frame 238 the fourth hit. It misses McGahee and takes Heap in the back. This is the hit that proves there were two defenders. Heap yells out "My God! They are going to kill us all." Somewhere around this time another hit that misses McGahee completely, strikes Joe Flacco down by the underpants. The runner brakes. The sixth and fatal hit, frame 313 takes McGahee in the head from the front. This is the key hit. McGahee going back and to his left. Hit from the front and right. Totally inconstant with the hit from Clark. Back and to the left, Back and to the left.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Law 220 Posted January 21, 2009 You're just pissing in the wind of ignorance lambert. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lambert58 56 Posted January 21, 2009 You're just pissing in the wind of ignorance lambert. I take it you have never seen the movie JFK? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Law 220 Posted January 21, 2009 Nope. I have. I'm just saying that your great effort at humor will fly over the head of the ignorant the same way reality has. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Melissa Stark 1 Posted January 21, 2009 lambert58 Back and to the left, Back and to the left Good post. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 21, 2009 Bump How the hell did this thread hit 7 pages?I know i am part of the problem now, but i wanted a free post. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 3,505 Posted January 21, 2009 Was it a legal hit, its up to the refs to make that distinction...... I am absolutely certain it was an illegal hit, but that is not unique to the Steelers, Hines Ward is notorious for playing like a d!ck, to purposely injure other players, and so do others on that team. Hard-hitting, nasty football is fun and entertaining, playing like idiot retards to end someones career is not. Forget the absence of class, its just plain wrong to do that to a fellow player. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skinny_Bastard 154 Posted January 21, 2009 Have the NFL made a ruling yet? If they don't think it's an illegal hit, why should you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Borat33 17 Posted January 21, 2009 Was it a legal hit, its up to the refs to make that distinction...... I am absolutely certain it was an illegal hit, but that is not unique to the Steelers, Hines Ward is notorious for playing like a d!ck, to purposely injure other players, and so do others on that team. Hard-hitting, nasty football is fun and entertaining, playing like idiot retards to end someones career is not. Forget the absence of class, its just plain wrong to do that to a fellow player. Yeah the Ravens have never played dirty. Ed Reed twisting Chris Johnson's back after the play is a perfect example. And that was not a dirty hit. There was no penalty or fine so the people who would actually know about this stuff said it was legal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Franknbeans 46 Posted January 21, 2009 Was it a legal hit, its up to the refs to make that distinction...... I am absolutely certain it was an illegal hit, but that is not unique to the Steelers, Hines Ward is notorious for playing like a d!ck, to purposely injure other players, and so do others on that team. Hard-hitting, nasty football is fun and entertaining, playing like idiot retards to end someones career is not. Forget the absence of class, its just plain wrong to do that to a fellow player. link? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted January 21, 2009 Was it a legal hit, its up to the refs to make that distinction...... I am absolutely certain it was an illegal hit, but that is not unique to the Steelers, Hines Ward is notorious for playing like a d!ck, to purposely injure other players, and so do others on that team. Hard-hitting, nasty football is fun and entertaining, playing like idiot retards to end someones career is not. Forget the absence of class, its just plain wrong to do that to a fellow player. Of course you are certain it was illegal...though, nobody but a few whiny pansies will ever agree with you. Ward is trying to purposefully injur players? And so do others on that team? LINK?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,602 Posted January 21, 2009 8 pages Just doing my part to see it reach 9 pages. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted January 21, 2009 I take back what I said about the crown of the helmet. I didn't realize the crown was the back of the top of the head, I thought it was the front of the top of the head. I'm a dope. Dan, now I understand why you were "not seeing it". Problem is...it was not the front of the top of the helmet that hit either. Nevertheless, Clark does clearly make initial contact with the front of the top of his head (about an inch to the right of center), not his shoulder, not the side of his head. It's worth noting that, just as the rule does not specify that the offensive player has to be hit in the head, nor does it specify that the offensive player must be defenseless, the rule also does not specify what part of the helmet must be used in order to draw a penalty. http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...k_McGahee-1.gif (warning: 2 MB gif) http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...r222/RC_WM_.png http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...222/RC_WM_0.png http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...222/RC_WM_1.png http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...222/RC_WM_2.png http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...222/RC_WM_3.png http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/si...222/RC_WM_4.png The above make clear some corrections to statements from earlier in the thread: -Contrary to what I said, Clark did not use the crown of his helmet, he used the front of the top of his helmet, slightly to the right of center. -Contrary to what some have said, Clark did not make initial contact with his shoulder. -Contrary to what some have said, Clark did not turn his head before contact. -Contrary to what some have said, Clark did not turn his body before contact. Your gif and pics again show it hits more the side of the helmet than the top front of it...right near the Steeler's logo. Not quite the crown as you keep whining about. And he does turn his head if you look at the rear view you would see it...rather than a side view. But you don't want facts...you just want to keep whining about what amounted to a good solid hit with accidental helmet to helmet contact. You can clearly see him brace to hit him with his shoulder...but you don't want to see that...you refuse to see that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted January 21, 2009 Here is exactly how it happened based off of the film: Frame 161, McGahee stops running as he hears something. Heap's head turns slightly to the right. Frame 193, the second arm hits McGahee in the throat from the front. Frame 225, McGahee emerging from behind the linebacker, you can see that he's obviously been hit, raising his arms to his throat. The third hit, frame 232, takes McGahee in the back pulling him downward and forward. Heap you'll notice shows no signs at all of being hit. He is visibly holding his helmet, which is impossiable if his wrist has been shattered. Heap is turning here now, frame 238 the fourth hit. It misses McGahee and takes Heap in the back. This is the hit that proves there were two defenders. Heap yells out "My God! They are going to kill us all." Somewhere around this time another hit that misses McGahee completely, strikes Joe Flacco down by the underpants. The runner brakes. The sixth and fatal hit, frame 313 takes McGahee in the head from the front. This is the key hit. McGahee going back and to his left. Hit from the front and right. Totally inconstant with the hit from Clark. Back and to the left, Back and to the left.. Nicley played. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 21, 2009 Have the NFL made a ruling yet?If they don't think it's an illegal hit, why should you? No fine for Clark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted January 21, 2009 Wow, OP looking more and more like a bitter ravens fan... Chris Mortensen: (11:19 AM ET ) I thought the league make the right decision to not fine the hit. McGahee caught the ball, turned and made a football move before the contact. Helmet to helmet hits are not banned in many instances. But the league cautions players because it's not just to guy being hit - it's the guy doing the hitting who is at risk,, too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted January 21, 2009 Wow, OP looking more and more like a bitter ravens fan... Wrong. t.j. is a bitter Raiders fan. Though that does leave plenty of bitterness to spill over into other areas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Durtee 0 Posted January 21, 2009 Wow, OP looking more and more like a bitter ravens fan... I don't think Mort and the rest of the Sports world would be discussing it if it wasn't borderline. So you homers can stop acting like it was the cleanest tackle ever made. Some people think it was dirty and others don't.... people disagree, that is the world that we all live in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted January 21, 2009 I don't think Mort and the rest of the Sports world would be discussing it if it wasn't borderline. So you homers can stop acting like it was the cleanest tackle ever made. Some people think it was dirty and others don't.... people disagree, that is the world that we all live in. mort and the rest of the sports world are discussing it because uninformed, ignorant and whiny people like the OP keep bringing it up. That quote was from Mort's chat. Anybody can spot flaws when moving at 1/4 speed, but in the real world, that was a clean hit. No flag, no penalty, no NFL statement = no questions...end of story. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted January 21, 2009 I don't think Mort and the rest of the Sports world would be discussing it if it wasn't borderline. So you homers can stop acting like it was the cleanest tackle ever made. Some people think it was dirty and others don't.... people disagree, that is the world that we all live in. Its being discussed because some people just can't wrap their heads around the fact that some hard and brutal hits are actually legal. And I am in no way a Steelers homer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,660 Posted January 21, 2009 Well let's see. Decade+ long veteran referees ruled it clean. The NFL, which had every camera angle known to man, ruled it clean, yet some of you think you know better than all of them. Gotcha. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phurfur 70 Posted January 21, 2009 Well let's see. Decade+ long veteran referees ruled it clean. The NFL, which had every camera angle known to man, ruled it clean, yet some of you think you know better than all of them. Gotcha. Yup, 8 pages worth of I don't know the rules very well but I am still mad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Melissa Stark 1 Posted January 21, 2009 Ray Lewis's Limo Driver Was it a legal hit, its up to the refs to make that distinction...... I am absolutely certain it was an illegal hit, but that is not unique to the Steelers, Hines Ward is notorious for playing like a d!ck, to purposely injure other players, and so do others on that team. When did Hines become a defensive player Could it be because he does what an elite WR should be doing when he doesn't get the ball? Like blocking downfield? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stonewall 647 Posted January 21, 2009 Somebody please put this thread out of its misery.......anyone who has EVER watched an NFL game knows that it was a very TYPICAL hit. We all understand about spearing quarterbacks and hits on defenselss receivers, and it was unfortunate that McGahee got banged up, but for petes sake............8 pages over an obviously clean hit according to NFL rules? Give it a rest already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,602 Posted January 21, 2009 Somebody please put this thread out of its misery.......anyone who has EVER watched an NFL game knows that it was a very TYPICAL hit. We all understand about spearing quarterbacks and hits on defenselss receivers, and it was unfortunate that McGahee got banged up, but for petes sake............8 pages over an obviously clean hit according to NFL rules? Give it a rest already. This thread MUST reach 10 pages. We need some more pointless arguing to do it though, come on guys, i know you can do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 541 Posted January 21, 2009 This thread has actually overtaken that comedically-brilliant "It's an exciting time to be a Seahawks' fan" thread. 8 pages to 7. Not as funny as that other one, but impressive nonetheless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted January 21, 2009 Oh fock it, i agree. As a Steelers fan I completely agree that Clark's hit was not only dirty and illegal, it was done with malicious intent to harm not only Willis McGahee, but his family and friends as well. That hit was so vicious it's clear that Clark (a known headhunter) was trying not just injure Willis, but to completely decapitate him, followed by him sticking Willis's detached head to the top of his own helmet and playing the rest of the game with a McGahee Hood Ornament. I've never seen such a disgusting display of random violence and treachery in my whole life... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,602 Posted January 21, 2009 Oh fock it, i agree. As a Steelers fan I completely agree that Clark's hit was not only dirty and illegal, it was done with malicious intent to harm not only Willis McGahee, but his family and friends as well. That hit was so vicious it's clear that Clark (a known headhunter) was trying not just injure Willis, but to completely decapitate him, followed by him sticking Willis's detached head to the top of his own helmet and playing the rest of the game with a McGahee Hood Ornament. I've never seen such a disgusting display of random violence and treachery in my whole life... If clark hits a Cardinal the same way in 2 weeks and it causes a fumble, you can bet your ass I will be cheering loudly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,660 Posted January 21, 2009 Yup, 8 pages worth of I don't know the rules very well but I am still mad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 21, 2009 If clark hits a Cardinal the same way in 2 weeks and it causes a fumble, you can bet your ass I will be cheering loudly. +1 (plus 3 actually!) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted January 21, 2009 If clark hits a Cardinal the same way in 2 weeks and it causes a fumble, you can bet your ass I will be cheering loudly. I hope he hits Fitz, Boldin, Warner and Whisenhut the same way!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Melissa Stark 1 Posted January 21, 2009 I love the fact that the Steelers audio personel had the music going while McGahee was taking his astronomy class. How rude is it to interupt a class. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stonewall 647 Posted January 22, 2009 O.K. Allow me the distinct honor of being the LAST poster on this enormously entertaining and informative thread. Good night folks! Thanks for coming! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,602 Posted January 22, 2009 O.K. Allow me the distinct honor of being the LAST poster on this enormously entertaining and informative thread. Good night folks! Thanks for coming! I am not going to stop you Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
