Editorial change for 2011/12
Again there shall be spot checks this season for ensuring players are following this rule.
Coaches’ Certification
ARTICLE 9. The head coach or his designated representative shall certify in writing to the umpire before the game that all players:
a. Have been informed what equipment is mandatory by rule and what constitutes illegal equipment.
b. Have been provided the equipment mandated by rule.
c. Have been instructed to wear and how to wear mandatory equipment during the game.
d. Have been instructed to notify the coaching staff when equipment becomes illegal through play during the game.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Friday, December 3, 2010
Extended period - untimed down
An unusual ending to the first half in game 1 last weekend that really needed to have the captains thinking clearly about the choice of a penalty. It is not as simple to extend the half only if Team B are penalized. This can occur if Team A are penalised in certain situations such as the one below.
Team A had 5 men in the backfield and flag was thrown for a live ball foul. Team A completed a pass in the EZ for a score. Time expired during the down.
Team B had the choice of:
1. Decline the penalty, Team A score and end of the half.
2. Accept the penalty, Team A don't score but the down is replayed and the half is expended for an untimed down.
The key to this is by accepting the penalty enforcement the down is replayed, even to extend the half for an untimed down. You cannot accept the penalty and not replay the down.
Here is the rule:
Extension of Periods
ARTICLE 3. a. A period shall be extended for an untimed down (other than a try) if during a down in which time expires one or more of the following occurs (A.R. 3-2-3-I-VIII):
1. A penalty is accepted for a live-ball foul(s) not treated as a dead-ball foul (Exception: Rule 10-2-5-a). The period is not extended if the statement of the penalty includes loss of down (A.R. 3-2-3-IX).
2. There are offsetting fouls.
3. An official sounds his whistle inadvertently or otherwise incorrectly signals the ball dead.
So by reading the rule there is nothing to say that only Team B fouls extend a quarter. In fact if Team A are leading and time expires in a half on a Team B foul they don't have to accept the penalty and play another down. They could decline the penalty and the half ends. We cannot use the generic statement that a half cannot end on a Team B penalty. It can only end if the penalty is declined.
AR - Time expires during Team A’s run for a touchdown after A70 fouls at the snap or clips during the down. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot for the foul at the snap or 15 yards for the clip. The 15-yard penalty is enforced from the previous spot if the clippingfoul occurs behind the neutral zone. The period is extended.
Quick question:
What if the same situation occurs at the end of the first or thrid quarter? Would you:
A. Accept the penalty and extend the quarter from the same end to replay the down.
B. Accept the penalty, change ends and then replay the down at the other end of the field and normal clock rules apply.
C. Decline the penalty to let Team A score and free kick for the new quarter after the extra point play.
Grant Martin
SAGOA
Team A had 5 men in the backfield and flag was thrown for a live ball foul. Team A completed a pass in the EZ for a score. Time expired during the down.
Team B had the choice of:
1. Decline the penalty, Team A score and end of the half.
2. Accept the penalty, Team A don't score but the down is replayed and the half is expended for an untimed down.
The key to this is by accepting the penalty enforcement the down is replayed, even to extend the half for an untimed down. You cannot accept the penalty and not replay the down.
Here is the rule:
Extension of Periods
ARTICLE 3. a. A period shall be extended for an untimed down (other than a try) if during a down in which time expires one or more of the following occurs (A.R. 3-2-3-I-VIII):
1. A penalty is accepted for a live-ball foul(s) not treated as a dead-ball foul (Exception: Rule 10-2-5-a). The period is not extended if the statement of the penalty includes loss of down (A.R. 3-2-3-IX).
2. There are offsetting fouls.
3. An official sounds his whistle inadvertently or otherwise incorrectly signals the ball dead.
So by reading the rule there is nothing to say that only Team B fouls extend a quarter. In fact if Team A are leading and time expires in a half on a Team B foul they don't have to accept the penalty and play another down. They could decline the penalty and the half ends. We cannot use the generic statement that a half cannot end on a Team B penalty. It can only end if the penalty is declined.
AR - Time expires during Team A’s run for a touchdown after A70 fouls at the snap or clips during the down. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot for the foul at the snap or 15 yards for the clip. The 15-yard penalty is enforced from the previous spot if the clippingfoul occurs behind the neutral zone. The period is extended.
Quick question:
What if the same situation occurs at the end of the first or thrid quarter? Would you:
A. Accept the penalty and extend the quarter from the same end to replay the down.
B. Accept the penalty, change ends and then replay the down at the other end of the field and normal clock rules apply.
C. Decline the penalty to let Team A score and free kick for the new quarter after the extra point play.
Grant Martin
SAGOA
Monday, October 4, 2010
Sniping / Head-hunting
To follow up on week 3 last year we are making it clear that for a player to be blocked well away from the ball and out of the play is not to be done or when someone has relaxed and the ball has become dead.
We were told later that this wasn't called in other places and to hear this shocks me when it is a safety call. It is not on to take a shot at someone who is blindsided and well out of the play. One was called in game 1 and another close to being called in game 2 and the player warned about it.
From week 3 2009:
Most of the NCAA football anyone here ever sees is Div 1 and in Div 1 you rarely have "spectators" on the field, unlike our level where this is remarkably common. The objections are always along the lines of "if they're on the field they should be ready to get hit" and I understand where you are coming from and even agree to a point. The question our officials mentally ask to clarify is simply "was the block made in aid of the ball carrier / tackler or was it simply taking a shot?" If you are taking a shot at a player who has pulled up as they've realised the ball has become dead even if the whistle hasn't yet gone you will get flagged. Football is a collision sport and we do not want to remove the contact at all. Nowhere in any true football program is there a place for players who only want to fly around the field taking shots at people just because they can. That is not football, just thuggery.
We were told later that this wasn't called in other places and to hear this shocks me when it is a safety call. It is not on to take a shot at someone who is blindsided and well out of the play. One was called in game 1 and another close to being called in game 2 and the player warned about it.
From week 3 2009:
Most of the NCAA football anyone here ever sees is Div 1 and in Div 1 you rarely have "spectators" on the field, unlike our level where this is remarkably common. The objections are always along the lines of "if they're on the field they should be ready to get hit" and I understand where you are coming from and even agree to a point. The question our officials mentally ask to clarify is simply "was the block made in aid of the ball carrier / tackler or was it simply taking a shot?" If you are taking a shot at a player who has pulled up as they've realised the ball has become dead even if the whistle hasn't yet gone you will get flagged. Football is a collision sport and we do not want to remove the contact at all. Nowhere in any true football program is there a place for players who only want to fly around the field taking shots at people just because they can. That is not football, just thuggery.
25/40 sec clock
We are now using the 25/40 sec play clock as per the 2009-10 NCAA Rules. The basic rule of thumb is if the play stops for any sort of administration of the game then there is a 25 play sec clock. If the game is continuing along at its own volition then the 40 sec play clock will be in play. Even if a 1st down is awarded then between plays is still 40 secs.
This comes under Rule 3 of the rule book.
This comes under Rule 3 of the rule book.
Returning the ball to an official
Last weekend of games showed up that without a close fence surrounding the field like we previously had that officials had to go and retrieve balls from well outside the field of play. It is not the job of the official to have to go and retrieve the ball in the game that you play, nor should it be the job of a ball person to retrieve a ball when you have been the closest player to it. If you think it is then it is your responsibility as a team to ensure the ball person is following along on the play, this rarely happens so it is the job of the player closest to retrieve the ball and return it to an official or to the ball person.
Page 123 of 2009-10 NCAA Rules state:
After a score or any other play, the player in possession immediately must return the ball to an official or leave it near the dead-ball spot. This prohibits:
(a) Kicking, throwing, spinning or carrying (including off of the field) the ball any distance that requires an official to retrieve it.
(b) Spiking the ball to the ground [Exception: A forward pass to conserve time (Rule 7-3-2-d)].
(c) Throwing the ball high into the air.
(d) Any other unsportsmanlike act or actions that delay the game.
So if you are a player who runs out of bounds carrying the ball it would be best to hand the ball to the official who is calling for it and is holding your spot. If your play ends in bounds an official will be coming to the dead ball spot so hand it to him or if you can't see them then leave the ball at that spot, but to drop it well out of the way of the official can delay getting the ball ready for play and/or may require the official to move from his spot and lose the place where you got up to. To drop it out of bounds and tell the official to get it or the ball person is unsportsmanlike, esp if those people have called for it 3 or 4 times.
Page 123 of 2009-10 NCAA Rules state:
After a score or any other play, the player in possession immediately must return the ball to an official or leave it near the dead-ball spot. This prohibits:
(a) Kicking, throwing, spinning or carrying (including off of the field) the ball any distance that requires an official to retrieve it.
(b) Spiking the ball to the ground [Exception: A forward pass to conserve time (Rule 7-3-2-d)].
(c) Throwing the ball high into the air.
(d) Any other unsportsmanlike act or actions that delay the game.
So if you are a player who runs out of bounds carrying the ball it would be best to hand the ball to the official who is calling for it and is holding your spot. If your play ends in bounds an official will be coming to the dead ball spot so hand it to him or if you can't see them then leave the ball at that spot, but to drop it well out of the way of the official can delay getting the ball ready for play and/or may require the official to move from his spot and lose the place where you got up to. To drop it out of bounds and tell the official to get it or the ball person is unsportsmanlike, esp if those people have called for it 3 or 4 times.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Week 5/6 Comments
A couple of rulings of note in the last couple of weeks:
Simon
- Re: Hurdling. There have been a number of complaints calling for hurdling calls, particularly against the Eagles RB. There are two arguments to refute this (emphasis mine):
Rule 2-14-1
a. Hurdling is an attempt by a player to jump with one or both feet or knees foremost over an opponent who is still on his feet (Rule 9-1-2-i).
b. “On his feet’’ means that no part of the opponent’s body other than one or both feet is in contact with the ground.
Rule 9-1-2
i. There shall be no hurdling (Exception: The ball carrier may hurdle an opponent.).
If ball carriers are athletic enough to be hurdling by the above definition, we should be applauding not penalising them!
- Re: Hands to the helmet. A couple of calls for this have been disputed as "a stiff arm", but the rule is pretty clear that only two exceptions apply:
Rule 9-1-2
k. No player shall continuously contact an opponent’s helmet (including the face mask) with hand(s) or arm(s) (Exception: By or against the ball carrier).
- Re: "Leaping" to block a FG/PAT. The rule in question is as follows:
Rule 9-1-2As always, contact us if you have any questions or comments
n. No defensive player, in an attempt to gain an advantage, may step, jump or stand on an opponent (Rule 9-3-5-b). No defensive player who runs forward from beyond the neutral zone and leaps from beyond the neutral zone in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or try may land on any player(s). It is not a foul if the leaping player was aligned in a stationary position within one yard of the line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped.
This means that the onus is on the defensive player to avoid contact with any player if he takes a run up, even if the offensive player fires out to engage. Despite seeming rather strange, we are interpreting this correctly according to multiple US conference sources.
Simon
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Week 4 Comments
A much shorter post this week as there were relatively few problems to comment on.
Firstly and most importantly, quality of sportsmanship was very high and consequently so was the quality of the games. Well done to all involved for focusing on the game and avoiding the peripheral activity.
Another reminder about spearing seems to be due this week though, with a number of flags and a large number of warnings. Keep your head up at all times and this is not going to be a problem for the most part, as the calls we've been making have all been from seeing the drop in the head at the last moment. Remember that both offensive and defensive players are prohibited from spearing - it is not only the defenders who can get called for it.
Regarding celebrations, there have been a number that have been called as taunting recently as the celebration is occurring right over the top of the tackled player. I realise that it is not as cut and dried as a TD score celebration, but defenders must not be facing the opposition bench or their opponent in order to avoid this penalty. On scoring celebrations, remember that the rule is "Score Legally" - in other words no high stepping or uncontested dives into the endzone etc. One was not flagged on the weekend, it should have been, and will be next time around.
Other than that, a good week for you guys from our perspective.
Simon
Firstly and most importantly, quality of sportsmanship was very high and consequently so was the quality of the games. Well done to all involved for focusing on the game and avoiding the peripheral activity.
Another reminder about spearing seems to be due this week though, with a number of flags and a large number of warnings. Keep your head up at all times and this is not going to be a problem for the most part, as the calls we've been making have all been from seeing the drop in the head at the last moment. Remember that both offensive and defensive players are prohibited from spearing - it is not only the defenders who can get called for it.
Regarding celebrations, there have been a number that have been called as taunting recently as the celebration is occurring right over the top of the tackled player. I realise that it is not as cut and dried as a TD score celebration, but defenders must not be facing the opposition bench or their opponent in order to avoid this penalty. On scoring celebrations, remember that the rule is "Score Legally" - in other words no high stepping or uncontested dives into the endzone etc. One was not flagged on the weekend, it should have been, and will be next time around.
Other than that, a good week for you guys from our perspective.
Simon
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Week 3 (and a bit of week 2) comments
Sorry for the absence of post last week, but this one is a bit of a joined up summary. Firstly points from the games:
Secondly there have been 2 major areas of concern/complaint/argument over the past two weeks, separated into:
Cut Blocking / Chop Blocking / Spearing
The discussions on The Bear have been interesting and at least I didn't have to chime in with my "cut blocking and chop blocking are not the same thing" - a personal bugbear.
Firstly, nowhere in the rules is there a term "cut block". What is defined is Blocking Below the Waist, which is generally referred to as cutting. BBW is legal with some exceptions, and I don't believe that any of the exceptions are being argued about. I'm happy to provide a discussion on that topic if people would find that useful or relevant?
Secondly, I believe that cut blocking is, along with being legal, a completely valid form of blocking (which I used and had used against me frequently while playing I might add).
However, there are two problems with it: players are not taught how to do it correctly and; players are not taught how to defend it correctly. I cringe every time I hear someone yelling "Just hit him in the knees" or "put your helmet in his legs" - these comments are ill-informed, dangerous and incredibly stupid. Funnily enough (another of my hobby horses) it is also against the Football Code ("Deliberately teaching players to violate the rules is indefensible.").
A block below the waist, when executed by leading with the helmet, will be penalised as spearing whenever seen.
By all means block low, but do it correctly and legally. Coaches must teach their players how to do this correctly, and not just leave it to chance. Players, especially OL and RB, make sure you know how to execute this safely and legally. Players, especially DL and LB, make sure you have been taught how to defend against low blocks.
Any coach who promotes putting a helmet to the knee of an opponent should really consider another avocation - that is unacceptable and I really can't be any clearer.
Chop blocking is illegal at all times and will be called even in borderline cases.
Sniping / Head-hunting
This is a term I use to describe blocks made against players who are completely out of the play and/or who have relaxed when the ball becomes dead. These blocks are penalised as unnecessary roughness and are prohibited by rule. Before I hear any screams about this not being called in the US etc. etc. etc., let me assure you that it is - you just very rarely see it.
Most of the NCAA football anyone here ever sees is Div 1 and in Div 1 you rarely have "spectators" on the field, unlike our level where this is remarkably common. The objections are always along the lines of "if they're on the field they should be ready to get hit" and I understand where you are coming from and even agree to a point.
The question our officials mentally ask to clarify is simply "was the block made in aid of the ball carrier / tackler or was it simply taking a shot?" If you are taking a shot at a player who has pulled up as they've realised the ball has become dead even if the whistle hasn't yet gone you will get flagged. In the contentious one from the weekend, the blocking player was almost stationary (no committed momentum to the block) and the player being blocked had clearly been slowing up for 2 or more steps. The block was thrown simultaneous with the whistle, but as the blocked player had clearly relaxed, the penalty was called. Video shows this play well and confirms the call.
Football is a collision sport and we do not want to remove the contact at all. Nowhere in any true football program is there a place for players who only want to fly around the field taking shots at people just because they can.
That is not football, just thuggery.
Simon
- Re: Spearing. We've had multiple warnings against every team over the last few weeks and little appears to have changed. Please make completely sure you are training players to never lead with the helmet or drop the head just before the point of contact. It is illegal and exceedingly dangerous as we are all aware.
- Re: Offensive Pass Interference. We have a number of receivers who are adopting a sort of Aussie Rules hip bump to clear out a defender as the ball is arriving. Rest assured that this is pass interference and the defense of "but I didn't push off" doesn't hold water!
- Re: Mandatory Safety Equipment. Rule 1-4-4 is blindingly clear:
All players shall wear the following mandatory equipment,
Cutting down pads is certainly "altering" and looking me in the eye and continuing arguing that they are not cut down (when they are clearly not evenly cut, or even the same on both sides!) also doesn't wash.
which shall be professionally manufactured and not altered to decrease
protection... - Re: Coach on the field to communicate with QB between plays. Yes, we allow latitude here, but just a couple of yards. Coming in past the numbers is too far and shouldn't be happening.
- Re: missed calls. We had a few on the weekend (mainly mine - not a good week), but all teams seemed to get some going for them and some against (from footage review). Apologies for the errors - we are not perfect and messages are going to coaches today about them. Unfortunately we are also the only group that is put in a position to apologise for errors!
- Hand the ball back. Most players on most teams are completely fine with this, but there are still exceptions. When a run has completed, please don't spin the ball on the ground, don't look at the official then bounce it away, don't wander off with it. Put it on the ground or hand it to the official, nothing else. I know this sounds a little petty, but on the wet surface it really is important to not let it roll around too much if at all possible. Surprisingly enough, we also don't particularly enjoy chasing after the ball that you've just rolled away. We also hold the belief that if a ball carrier wants to roll the ball around on the ground, the team obviously doesn't care if the ball is wet or dry - so requests for a dry ball will be disregarded completely.
Secondly there have been 2 major areas of concern/complaint/argument over the past two weeks, separated into:
Cut Blocking / Chop Blocking / Spearing
The discussions on The Bear have been interesting and at least I didn't have to chime in with my "cut blocking and chop blocking are not the same thing" - a personal bugbear.
Firstly, nowhere in the rules is there a term "cut block". What is defined is Blocking Below the Waist, which is generally referred to as cutting. BBW is legal with some exceptions, and I don't believe that any of the exceptions are being argued about. I'm happy to provide a discussion on that topic if people would find that useful or relevant?
Secondly, I believe that cut blocking is, along with being legal, a completely valid form of blocking (which I used and had used against me frequently while playing I might add).
However, there are two problems with it: players are not taught how to do it correctly and; players are not taught how to defend it correctly. I cringe every time I hear someone yelling "Just hit him in the knees" or "put your helmet in his legs" - these comments are ill-informed, dangerous and incredibly stupid. Funnily enough (another of my hobby horses) it is also against the Football Code ("Deliberately teaching players to violate the rules is indefensible.").
A block below the waist, when executed by leading with the helmet, will be penalised as spearing whenever seen.
By all means block low, but do it correctly and legally. Coaches must teach their players how to do this correctly, and not just leave it to chance. Players, especially OL and RB, make sure you know how to execute this safely and legally. Players, especially DL and LB, make sure you have been taught how to defend against low blocks.
Any coach who promotes putting a helmet to the knee of an opponent should really consider another avocation - that is unacceptable and I really can't be any clearer.
Chop blocking is illegal at all times and will be called even in borderline cases.
Sniping / Head-hunting
This is a term I use to describe blocks made against players who are completely out of the play and/or who have relaxed when the ball becomes dead. These blocks are penalised as unnecessary roughness and are prohibited by rule. Before I hear any screams about this not being called in the US etc. etc. etc., let me assure you that it is - you just very rarely see it.
Most of the NCAA football anyone here ever sees is Div 1 and in Div 1 you rarely have "spectators" on the field, unlike our level where this is remarkably common. The objections are always along the lines of "if they're on the field they should be ready to get hit" and I understand where you are coming from and even agree to a point.
The question our officials mentally ask to clarify is simply "was the block made in aid of the ball carrier / tackler or was it simply taking a shot?" If you are taking a shot at a player who has pulled up as they've realised the ball has become dead even if the whistle hasn't yet gone you will get flagged. In the contentious one from the weekend, the blocking player was almost stationary (no committed momentum to the block) and the player being blocked had clearly been slowing up for 2 or more steps. The block was thrown simultaneous with the whistle, but as the blocked player had clearly relaxed, the penalty was called. Video shows this play well and confirms the call.
Football is a collision sport and we do not want to remove the contact at all. Nowhere in any true football program is there a place for players who only want to fly around the field taking shots at people just because they can.
That is not football, just thuggery.
Simon
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Week 1 comments
Each week I will be posting comments here based on our own post-game reviews (and normally after seeing the DVD, although obviously not this week).
Week one had a number of points we'd like to raise, including the following:
- The Football Code. All players are expected to have read and understood this, and each Head Coach certifies before the game that they uphold it. Please note that all registered players, coaches and ancillary, are bound by this code and this includes outside a game itself. For example abusing players, coaches and officials from the grandstand is a clear contravention and must cease immediately. You are not "just a spectator" as I've had said to me before, you are a member and ambassador of the league and must act appropriately. This is not directed at just one team, as members of at least two teams in the stands were clearly heard from the field on Saturday.
- The Football Code part II. Calling out "Thanks
" from the sideline when opponents have penalties assessed against them is unsportsmanlike and must cease - again two different teams had this on more than one occasion, even after being warned. - Mouthguards. A couple of illegal ones have already been picked up, but checks will continue. Please ensure that they meet the rules and (in particular) are not cut down/back.
- Fumbles. Diving on a loose ball is completely acceptable and an encouraged practise. However when there is already a large pile of players, diving on top of the pile and in particular targeting opponents i is not acceptable and will be penalised as USC - as occurred twice on Saturday.
- Targeting. As would have been explained to all players, targeting a defenseless player by initiating contact with the helmet and/or contacting above the shoulder is a personal foul and will generally lead to ejection. Every call of targeting, whether ejected or not, will face league review (as per the current NCAA rules) for additional suspension / penalty. This was covered at the pre-season coaches meeting.
As always, contact me if you have questions about this post - Simon.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
See what you hit
http://www.jonheck.com/hdc/comments/seewhathit.htm
See What You Hit ... Almost Always Misunderstood
By Jon Heck, MS, ATC 9/07 "See What You Hit" is a phrase that had good intentions. It came along to help eliminate head-down contact and serious cervical spine injuries. Unfortunately, the often- used phrase is almost always misunderstood by coaches, players and lots and lots of others. Most interpret this phrase to mean "initiate contact your face mask." And it's easy to understand why, the phrase can easily lead you in that direction. It's to the point where I often wonder if it's done more harm than good. I do not use the phrase when I'm talking about contact in football.
See What You Hit ... Almost Always Misunderstood
By Jon Heck, MS, ATC 9/07 "See What You Hit" is a phrase that had good intentions. It came along to help eliminate head-down contact and serious cervical spine injuries. Unfortunately, the often- used phrase is almost always misunderstood by coaches, players and lots and lots of others. Most interpret this phrase to mean "initiate contact your face mask." And it's easy to understand why, the phrase can easily lead you in that direction. It's to the point where I often wonder if it's done more harm than good. I do not use the phrase when I'm talking about contact in football.
It was developed to help teach players to approach contact with their head-up. It was never intended to be an ally for coaches to teach their players to initiate contact with their helmet in tackling, blocking or any other type of contact. In fact it was and remains a rule violation to initiate contact with the face mask (ie, head-up) in high school and college football. The idea is to approach contact with the head-up and then to make contact with the shoulder while keeping the neck in extension. A more precise and accurate phrase is "See What You're About to Hit". Or even better "See What You're About to Hit With Your Shoulder". But the objective is never to literally "See What You Hit" by initiating contact with your face mask.
Leading with the helmet will lead to trouble, sooner or later.
This is a direct quote from the 2007 High School Football Rule Book, and it's been in every Rule Book as far back as I can remember. "... the intent to make contact 'face up' is no guarantee that the position can be maintained at the moment of impact. Consequently, the teaching of blocking/tackling techniques which keep the helmeted head from receiving the brunt of the impact are now required by rule and coaching ethics ..."
The problem with teaching players to initiate contact with the face mask is two fold. First anytime an athlete initiates contact with the head he increases the risk of concussion and closed head injuries. Obviously, not a good thing. But the biggest risk is that the players will not execute the face first contact as intended and drop their head at the last instant. And when this happens it puts the athlete in the head-down position and at risk of axial loading and cervical spine fracture. And remember, it is instinctive for players to drop their head to protect their eyes and face at contact. It is this exact problem that is credited with the highest incidence of catastrophic neck injuries in the early 1970's ... teaching athletes to initiate contact with their "face in the numbers" and the athletes dropping their head's at contact.
So I would like to see the phrase 'exit stage left'. It's misinterpretation remains a reason coaches and players still believe it's OK to initiate contact with the helmet. It should be replaced with "When the shoulder goes down, the head comes up" or "Whenever you lower your shoulder, raise your head." None of the these are as short and sweet, but they're more accurate. And there is always "See what you're about to hit with your shoulder", it won't win any advertising campains but it will help players understand things a bit better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
