The NFL's New "MC Hammer" rule

Intimidated by intense football threads? Don't be... learn about football, the Washington Redskins and more.

Does the "U Can't Touch This Rule" hurt or help the game?

Helps
4
21%
Hurts
15
79%
 
Total votes : 19
~~
User avatar
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

The NFL's New "MC Hammer" rule

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:57 pm

I noticed last night that ABC kept explaining the new extra enforcement of the 5-yd. contact rule (aka "U Can't Touch This" rule :wink: ), and I recall seeing a flag thrown for PI that, in year's past, would have never been called. Will this usher in higher scoring contests? Is this too much? Are there any rules made up to help the defensive backs?

If receivers cannot be touched, look for recievers like Coles, Owens, Moss, Boldin, and others to have monster years. This looks like it'll be a sticky situation this year, to me. What do you all think?
Back and better than ever!

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5220
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 2:03 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Postby cvillehog » Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:59 pm

The way Al and John explained it, it seemed like the rule is actually unchanged, but they are determined to enforce it this year. Is that right?

They also made it sound like the penalty that would be called for breaking the rule would be "illegal touching" or something similar, and that the pass interference rules (defensive and offensive) are unchanged.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

~~
User avatar
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:04 pm

I didn't hear their full explanations of the rule, but it does seem near impossible to cover guys if you can't touch them.

I'm not implying holding the guy's arm to slow him down, but some contact may happen if you're playing a man tight, no?
Back and better than ever!

Mmmm...donuts
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: How much text will they let me fit in this 'Location' space? I mean, can I just keep writing and wr

Postby joebagadonuts » Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:40 pm

if they continue to enforce it like they did last night, then it sucks. there will be way too many stopages of play for pass interference penalties. fans will become frustrated and bored.

if they enforce it as they should, where a defender can touch a receiver so long as that contact does not impede the receiver's ability to move or catch the ball, then all will be well.....except in new england, where they'll have to figure out another way for their dbacks to play.
I'm a jack of all trades, the master of three
Rockin' the tables, rockin' the mikes, rockin' the young lay-dees.

FanFromAnnapolis
Posts: 11086
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 6:01 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Postby Irn-Bru » Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:37 pm

joebagadonuts wrote:if they continue to enforce it like they did last night, then it sucks. there will be way too many stopages of play for pass interference penalties. fans will become frustrated and bored.

if they enforce it as they should, where a defender can touch a receiver so long as that contact does not impede the receiver's ability to move or catch the ball, then all will be well.....except in new england, where they'll have to figure out another way for their dbacks to play.


New England and Philidelphia both. The tricky thing about this rule (as noted, it is unchanged, just kind of rekindled, I suppose) is that it's so easy to call a flag. It's like offensive holding--technically, you could call it on every single play because it just happens.

In my opinion (see Sam Huff quote below), the game has only been nuanced and changed to help the offense, and it saddens me every time a new rule (or interpretation of the rule) is implemented.
"Last year I thought we'd win it all. This year I know we will." - Rex Ryan, on what would become the 8-8 2011 Jets

"Dream team." - Vince Young, on what would become the 8-8 2011 Eagles

Pursuer of Justice
Posts: 5798
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Newark, Delaware

Postby Justice Hog » Wed Aug 11, 2004 1:15 pm

This "enforcement of an old rule" is simply the response to a few teams crying about how aggressive other teams are playing. Get over it! This is football you freakin' wimps!
Fran Farren
"Justice Hog"

Newark, DE

6th person to join the "new THN message boards"

Section 341, Row 8, Seats #15 & #16

"Justice that love gives is a surrender, justice that law gives is a punishment."
-Mohandas Gandhi

aka Evil Hog
User avatar
Posts: 6481
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:01 am
Location: South of Heaven, trying to hit a toilet on shrooms

Postby hailskins666 » Wed Aug 11, 2004 1:50 pm

it's so hard for a zebra to say what may or may not be intentional, especially when the game is moving at that type of speed. i say if it ain't broke, it can't be fixed. but what do i know?
THN's resident jerk.

Glock .40 Model 22 - First* line of home defense.... 'ADT' is for liberals.

Hog
Posts: 877
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 9:33 pm

Postby curveball » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:38 pm

This "increased enforcement" is a direct result of last year's playoffs.

People are in prison for less than the NE DBs did to the Colts receivers in the title game.

Some teams and players seemed to get 10 yards instead of 5, if this new emphasis levels the playing field, I'm all for it.

You'd be all for it also if you were one of the teams that always got the short end of the stick.
This space reserved for BTP......If he ever wins it.

~~
User avatar
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:42 pm

curveball wrote:This "increased enforcement" is a direct result of last year's playoffs.

People are in prison for less than the NE DBs did to the Colts receivers in the title game.

Some teams and players seemed to get 10 yards instead of 5, if this new emphasis levels the playing field, I'm all for it.

You'd be all for it also if you were one of the teams that always got the short end of the stick.

After watching a few games this weekend, I think they ARE being enforced evenly. It didn't really hamper the Skins' play, and actually worked in our favor once or twice.

The blatant non-call aside, the enforcement of the rule has not hindered the game to the degree I thought it would.
Back and better than ever!

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5220
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 2:03 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Postby cvillehog » Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:02 pm

curveball wrote:People are in prison for less than the NE DBs did to the Colts receivers in the title game.


LOL Nice quote. :lol:

Brown in the Hall
Posts: 4290
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 4:26 pm
Location: Carolina Country

Postby NC43Hog » Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:38 pm

Like any rule, as long as they call it both ways it's fair. Also, if the offensive player initiates the contact it's not a foul.

Side Note: We did see an offensive pass interfence call (Panther Game) which we don't see much - of course this one was pretty blatant.
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son." - Dean Wormer

Hog
Posts: 3472
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 12:39 pm
Location: Croydon, PA

Postby General Failure » Mon Aug 16, 2004 4:46 pm

Apparently they blew this call once in the Eagles/Pats game. Pinkston was flagged for being the first one to touch the ball after going out of bounds, but he never went out in the first five yards. The replay never showed where he went out, but there was a great shot of the ref tossing his hat down where he said Pinkston went out.

I don't buy it though. I think Pinkston was manhandled once again.
I got your number. I steal your thunder. I got your mother's maiden name tattooed on my arm.

---
User avatar
Posts: 18570
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:55 pm
Location: AJT

Postby Chris Luva Luva » Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:58 pm

if they enforce it as they should, where a defender can touch a receiver so long as that contact does not impede the receiver's ability to move or catch the ball, then all will be well.....except in new england, where they'll have to figure out another way for their dbacks to play.


You hit the nail right on the head. People like Chris McCalister, our S. Springs and other bigger DB's will have a hard time in coverage. You need some sort of touching although it should impeded the WR.

I know when I played CB I'd press my arm against the WR while looking back for the ball, it allowed me to keep track of the WR and break with him just incase. I wasn't impeding him or holding, just keeping track, I guarantee they'll call that this year as interference.
Fios - Arbiter of All Positive Knowledge

Kaz - "Was kinda obvious since we all know you're not a moron"

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:52 pm
Location: The Heart

Postby redskincity » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:21 pm

If they would have paid more attention to the "MC Hammer rule" last year, Indy would have won the SB. They said that game alone had over 15 potential penalties. It will hurt physical teams like the Patriots.
• NFL Championships
1937, 1942, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Conference Championships
1936, 1937, 1940, 1942, 1943, 1945, 1972, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Division Championships
1972, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1991, 1999,
• All-Time Record:
515-465-27

aka Evil Hog
User avatar
Posts: 6481
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:01 am
Location: South of Heaven, trying to hit a toilet on shrooms

Postby hailskins666 » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:39 pm

maybe this rule is the only way to stop the patsies! nothing else has any effect on em. :shock:
THN's resident jerk.

Glock .40 Model 22 - First* line of home defense.... 'ADT' is for liberals.

Return to Football 101