Mixed feelings on this rule...

I'm all for preventing injuries in contact sports. However, I don't think I like the "horse collar" rule. It seems to me that the only way you can successfully tackle a player from behind is to get him between the shoulder pads and the knees. Can someone shed some light on this?

We had the same discussion. Is it supposed to be dangerous like a face masking incident?

The only thing I can think of is it is possible to get a whiplash-like or concussion injury.

This is a brief explanation of why NFL instigated the rule.

[url=http://www.ehow.com/list_6707468_rules-tackling-nfl.html]http://www.ehow.com/list_6707468_rules- ... g-nfl.html[/url]

One thing I found interesting in the Friday games, it was called one time when a player grabbed the sweater, pretty sure the NFL only calls it for the actual shoulder pads.

See the Ken Yon Rambo injury last season for the reasoning.

Horse collar tackles can be very dangerous because of the way a players legs go underneath him on the tackle. In an open field when a player is moving at high speed it's worse then if it happens right off the snap before the play has really fully developed and sometimes you'll see the same type of tackle not called or called depending on the violence of the take down.
Calling it or not I believe is similiar to holding calls, if an O-lineman keeps his hands inside and close they rarely get called, (busted) but as soon as they move the hands up and out to 'steer' then they get called.
Horse collaring a QB standing still with one hand in the collar and one around the waist might not get the call but a RB 20 yards past the LOS and going full out being tackled with two hands deep in the collar will.
There's different severities of the type of tackle and generally only the most severe get called.

The problem is the inconsistent application of this rule. Cobb was clearly (and more blantantly) dragged down with a horse collar on the play where Hage was called for holding. The rule needs a clearer definition and much more consistent application.

Its a good rule if the CFL officials had a clue on how to call it.
They call it for practically every tackle from behind. Its supposed to be called if you use the INSIDE of the pads (jersey) as leverage for the tackle.


If your opponent runs past you you may not tackle him!!!

That's a ludicrous statement. A horse-collar is not the only way to tackle a player from behind. One of the easiest, perhaps :wink:, but not the only one.

The problem i have with the horse-collar penalty on Jamal Johnson last night is that the ref through the flag so late. He watched the tackle happen, then waited about 10 seconds and when he saw the bomber bench freaking out he decided to throw it. At least thats what it seemed like to me.

Most effective way too, how can you fault someone for doing the most sure thing they can to get their job done.

Scr@w you Roy Williams!!!

Johnson's lucky they didn't see the facemask penalty, I don't know if they combine the two or what but he was getting called for something on that tackle for sure.

Before someone else corrects me, i know the difference between "through" and "threw". Obviously just a simple typo that i didn't recognize until now.

Nice find Matelot! That clears it up perfectly.

LOL do the CFL officials know how to call anything. So much inconsistency in the league and between games in east and west. Grabbing of jersey should not be a horsecollar