Damar Hamlin fined $4,806

[Cntrygal]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Also, the NFL fined <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Bills?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Bills</a> S Damar Hamlin $4,806 for a hit on <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Patriots?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Patriots</a> WR Jakobi Meyers last Thursday night. Hamlin was flagged and ejected.</p>&mdash; Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1601682952034783232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 10, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Goobylal]

That's a low fine and indicative that the NFL doesn't think he deserved to be ejected. And thus (and rightfully) no suspension.

[Woodman]

I thought the hit was a good one.

[Mace]

I thought the hit was a good one.

I didn't. It wasn't. Doesn't matter if it was intentional. You don't train your players to do that, and they shouldn't.

[Buffalogic]

The flag and the ejection and now the fine are utterly absurd. I guess he's supposed to just let the opposition score a touchdown. Ridiculous.

[Woodman]

The flag and the ejection and now the fine are utterly absurd. I guess he's supposed to just let the opposition score a touchdown. Ridiculous.

100% correct!

[Cali512]

How about they do this. If its clearly a head on contact to a literal defensless receiver, its 15 yds plus a possible large fine. If its a hit to the chest or ball, its a 5 yd penalty. That combines the incentive to not hit them in the head, but not totally alter the game due to the player doing his job

[Goobylal]

I didn't. It wasn't. Doesn't matter if it was intentional. You don't train your players to do that, and they shouldn't.

It was a great hit because it prevented a TD. The penalty is debatable since Hamlin lowered his aim so as to not hit Meyers high, but Meyers lowered his head. The ejection was bogus and rightfully there was no suspension.

[Mace]

The flag and the ejection and now the fine are utterly absurd. I guess he's supposed to just let the opposition score a touchdown. Ridiculous.

It was textbook by the rules. You'd be screaming your head off if anyone did that to Allen, crying like a mother****er for massive penalties. Man up.

[YardRat]

Mac Jones was fined 2x+ that with no penalty or disqualification.

[DraftBoy]

It was a great hit because it prevented a TD. The penalty is debatable since Hamlin lowered his aim so as to not hit Meyers high, but Meyers lowered his head. The ejection was bogus and rightfully there was no suspension.

It was an illegal hit and he was rightfully ejected. There was no additional discipline needed for the hit. Hamlin didn’t even argue the ejection because he knew it was legit.

[DraftBoy]

It was textbook by the rules. You'd be screaming your head off if anyone did that to Allen, crying like a mother****er for massive penalties. Man up.

The hypocritical way fans view penalties is just pathetic. An opponent breathes on your team you want it viewed as a capital offense, but your team break clearly violate the rules of the game and it’s like they go blind temporarily. One of the worst parts about every fan base.

[Mace]

It was a great hit because it prevented a TD. The penalty is debatable since Hamlin lowered his aim so as to not hit Meyers high, but Meyers lowered his head. The ejection was bogus and rightfully there was no suspension.

It absolutely wasn't debatable because it was textbook by the rules. You don't say it was a great hit because someones spine wasn't snapped.

I wasn't happy, but I clearly saw it beyond my own emotional involvement. I wouldn't want to see that happen to a Bill, and that's about all I can say. I can't see yu defending that hit if it happened against a Bill.

[Buffalogic]

It was textbook by the rules. You'd be screaming your head off if anyone did that to Allen, crying like a mother****er for massive penalties. Man up.
Stupid comment. Horrible comparison.

[Goobylal]

It was an illegal hit and he was rightfully ejected. There was no additional discipline needed for the hit. Hamlin didn’t even argue the ejection because he knew it was legit.

If he deserved to be ejected then every defenseless receiver call should carry an automatic ejection. I've seen very few ejections even on worse hits than that one.

[DraftBoy]

If he deserved to be ejected then every defenseless receiver call should carry an automatic ejection. I've seen very few ejections even on worse hits than that one.

He deserved to be ejected. Your opinion on other teams has no relevance.

[cookie G]

The flag and the ejection and now the fine are utterly absurd. I guess he's supposed to just let the opposition score a touchdown. Ridiculous.

I can only suggest you read the rule:

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2022-nfl-rulebook/#article-9-players-in-a-defenseless-posture

Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;

and...

Notes

A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact.



It isn't that difficult, unless people don't want to understand it.

[Goobylal]

He deserved to be ejected. Your opinion on other teams has no relevance.

Wrong. And obviously the NFL doesn't believe so either given the paltry fine and no suspension. Mac Jones got fined twice the amount for just throwing a ball at Epenesa.

[Buffalogic]

I can only suggest you read the rule:

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2022-nfl-rulebook/#article-9-players-in-a-defenseless-posture

Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;

and...

Notes

A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact.



It isn't that difficult, unless people don't want to understand it.
even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him

AKA just let them score a touchdown. It's not about understanding the rule, it's about the rule being stupid. Ever heard of the tuck rule? Stupid.

It isn't that difficult, unless people don't want to understand it.

[YardRat]

The hit is only a penalty because there ended up being contact with the head and neck area. If Hamlin completes the play a little lower on the body or Meyer doesn't duck, with no head/neck contact it would be 'clean'. And it isn't nearly as flagrant as Jarvis Landry's hit on Aaron Williams, who "launched" and intentionally went for AW's head with his shoulder.

So, yeah it's definitely a penalty, and yeah I will ***** like crazy the next time a Buffalo player is hit like that and it isn't called.

[mightysimi]

How long before we start to hold WR's accountable for putting themselves in a defenseless position? I don't think it's fair the WR can sell out to get the ball and all the requirements for his safety are on the defender. At some point they have to responsible for their own safety too IMO.

Speaking in generalities here not just on the Hamlin hit where the guy didn't extend that far.

[DraftBoy]

Wrong. And obviously the NFL doesn't believe so either given the paltry fine and no suspension. Mac Jones got fined twice the amount for just throwing a ball at Epenesa.

:rofl:

[DraftBoy]

How long before we start to hold WR's accountable for putting themselves in a defenseless position? I don't think it's fair the WR can sell out to get the ball and all the requirements for his safety are on the defender. At some point they have to responsible for their own safety too IMO.

Speaking in generalities here not just on the Hamlin hit where the guy didn't extend that far.

Never.

[mightysimi]

Never.
I don't know, you might see it called less at one point. They have started to call less penalties in the NHL for guys that turn their back right before contact. They are putting themselves at risk here and shouldn't get a game time advantage to do it. Either way you are probably right it won't happen but I always thought it was odd that only half of the people involved in the collision are at fault.

[cookie G]

even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him

AKA just let them score a touchdown. It's not about understanding the rule, it's about the rule being stupid. Ever heard of the tuck rule? Stupid.

It isn't that difficult, unless people don't want to understand it.

Yeah, well no, its nothing like the Tuck Rule. Its a safety rule, intended to keep people out of the blue tent and hopefully cut down on the concussion protocols. And hopefully keep players off the injury list with

As far as "what he could have done", Yardie answered you, he could have hit lower. Sorry he didn't. Maybe he couldn't have. But that doesn't eliminate that its a penalty.

To follow your logic, a penalty is excused if its done to prevent a TD.

Example. A RB is running to the outside. A DB dives to stop him. As he's diving, he grabs the face mask, the only part of the RB he could grab.

Under your logic, the penalty would be absurd, because "what's he supposed to do, let the RB run by him for a touchdown?"

[notacon]

I didn't. It wasn't. Doesn't matter if it was intentional. You don't train your players to do that, and they shouldn't.

I’m with you Mace. Totally unnecessary and very dangerous hit.

He deserved to be ejected and is lucky he only got fined so little.

If any other opposing S did that exact same hit against one of the Bills receivers we would all be (rightfully) up in arms.

[DraftBoy]

I don't know, you might see it called less at one point. They have started to call less penalties in the NHL for guys that turn their back right before contact. They are putting themselves at risk here and shouldn't get a game time advantage to do it. Either way you are probably right it won't happen but I always thought it was odd that only half of the people involved in the collision are at fault.

I don’t think so. The league has a liability issue, they will not go back to a big hit or head hunting league.

[Goobylal]

:rofl:

So you've got nothing? OK.

[Buffalogic]

Yeah, well no, its nothing like the Tuck Rule. Its a safety rule, intended to keep people out of the blue tent and hopefully cut down on the concussion protocols. And hopefully keep players off the injury list with

As far as "what he could have done", Yardie answered you, he could have hit lower. Sorry he didn't. Maybe he couldn't have. But that doesn't eliminate that its a penalty.

To follow your logic, a penalty is excused if its done to prevent a TD.

Example. A RB is running to the outside. A DB dives to stop him. As he's diving, he grabs the face mask, the only part of the RB he could grab.

Under your logic, the penalty would be absurd, because "what's he supposed to do, let the RB run by him for a touchdown?"
"even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him"

That is an all encompassing statement that leaves no room for contact of any sort. It's absurd.

[DraftBoy]

So you've got nothing? OK.

Not when your entire argument is that he didn’t get suspended for a play that didn’t warrant a suspension and that he got less than a fine than Mac Jones whose call was missed by officials.

Your assumption about that somehow meaning anything and using is the basis for the original call being incorrect are just wrong. There really isn’t much to say because your points aren’t really based on anything.

[DraftBoy]

"even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him"

That is an all encompassing statement that leaves no room for contact of any sort. It's absurd.

Yes….there shouldn’t be any contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player. This isn’t a new rule, it’s been around for a number of years…

[mightysimi]

I don’t think so. The league has a liability issue, they will not go back to a big hit or head hunting league.
That is my point, how long before the liability hammer starts looking at WRs putting themselves into dangerous positions. I get it is highly unlikely but it still bothers me that only 1 of the 2 has to worry about safety

[Goobylal]

Not when your entire argument is that he didn’t get suspended for a play that didn’t warrant a suspension and that he got less than a fine than Mac Jones whose call was missed by officials.

Your assumption about that somehow meaning anything and using is the basis for the original call being incorrect are just wrong. There really isn’t much to say because your points aren’t really based on anything.

That's the only argument to make. Officials get calls wrong all the time (you even just admitted they missed the Jones call during the game) so just going by what they called during a game is what's really wrong. The league obviously reviewed the game and decided that the hit at least didn't merit an ejection, otherwise he'd have been fined a substantially larger amount than he was.

[DraftBoy]

That's the only argument to make. Officials get calls wrong all the time (you even just admitted they missed the Jones call during the game) so just going by what they called during a game is what's really wrong. The league obviously reviewed the game and decided that the hit at least didn't merit an ejection, otherwise he'd have been fined a substantially larger amount than he was.

That’s not how this works.

[Goobylal]

That’s not how this works.

Sure it it. The refs make in-game mistakes sometimes and the NFL cleans them up afterwards, like the fine for Jones on a play that wasn't even penalized. In no world does a hit, supposedly dangerous enough to get a player ejected, deserve a fine that is not only worth pocket change for a player, but half the amount of a play where there wasn't even contact between players.

[DraftBoy]

Sure it it. The refs make in-game mistakes sometimes and the NFL cleans them up afterwards, like the fine for Jones on a play that wasn't even penalized. In no world does a hit, supposedly dangerous enough to get a player ejected, deserve a fine that is not only worth pocket change for a player, but half the amount of a play where there wasn't even contact between players.

No, it's literally not. You've completely invented this correlation between fine amounts and the legitimacy of a call. If anything, the fact that he got fined any amount of money further proves that the hit was dangerous and illegal. Had he not been fined at all you'd have a point, but by consistently pointing out that the player received additional punishment for the hit you're just providing an argument against your own point.

[Forward_Lateral]

The Bills should fine him for his awful tackling

[Goobylal]

No, it's literally not. You've completely invented this correlation between fine amounts and the legitimacy of a call. If anything, the fact that he got fined any amount of money further proves that the hit was dangerous and illegal. Had he not been fined at all you'd have a point, but by consistently pointing out that the player received additional punishment for the hit you're just providing an argument against your own point.

If you've been paying attention, I said that the low fine amount is indicative that the ejection was unwarranted.

[DraftBoy]

If you've been paying attention, I said that the low fine amount is indicative that the ejection was unwarranted.

If the ejection was unwarranted then why did he receive additional punishment on top of it? That doesn’t make any sense.

[Goobylal]

If the ejection was unwarranted then why did he receive additional punishment on top of it? That doesn’t make any sense.

Defenseless receiver hits get fined.

[DraftBoy]

Defenseless receiver hits get fined.

Exactly. Which means the penalty and ejection were valid.

[Goobylal]

Exactly. Which means the penalty and ejection were valid.

No it does not. It means just the penalty was. If the ejection had been valid, he would have fined him far more he was. Like at least more than Jones was for a non-dangerous play.

[Forward_Lateral]

I honestly did not know that they could eject a player for a hit to the head area. It's the first time I've seen it in the NFL.

[DraftBoy]

No it does not. It means just the penalty was. If the ejection had been valid, he would have fined him far more he was. Like at least more than Jones was for a non-dangerous play.

I’ll tell you what, prove where that is actually stated in any rule book or guidance memo that the NFL has put out and I’ll concede. Otherwise this is just going to further devolve.

[DraftBoy]

I honestly did not know that they could eject a player for a hit to the head area. It's the first time I've seen it in the NFL.

The rule has been in place for a few years now I think. Can’t remember when it started though. There was a bunch of hand wringing the media last month over a situation involving Hebert.

[Forward_Lateral]

The rule has been in place for a few years now I think. Can’t remember when it started though. There was a bunch of hand wringing the media last month over a situation involving Hebert.
I feel like it might've gone back to the Burfict hit on Brown, but maybe not? Do you remember ever seeing a guy ejected since the rule was invoked?

[Woodman]

The Bills should fine him for his awful tackling

I'll bet they get right on that. :snicker:

[Goobylal]

I honestly did not know that they could eject a player for a hit to the head area. It's the first time I've seen it in the NFL.

It rarely happens and was wholly misapplied in Hamlin's case. As I've been saying to DB, the paltry fine shows the league review doesn't believe the ejection had any merit, otherwise it would have been a much larger fine. You can see Hamlin go lower to try and avoid trying to hitting Meyers high, but Meyers lowers his helmet.

[DraftBoy]

I feel like it might've gone back to the Burfict hit on Brown, but maybe not? Do you remember ever seeing a guy ejected since the rule was invoked?

Couple of times including the one last month. It doesn’t happen too often, but I have seen it enforced.

[notacon]

Matt Milano (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzg7i9OFFcQ) showed the textbook way to level a divesting hit on a player when he destroyed Mike White. Although it is a different situation (of hitting a QB after a throw) Milano did it right....Hamlin did not.

I just watched the Hamlin hit again (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCtw2tK1t4E).

Hamlin could gone a little lower on Myers body (instead of his head) like Milano did, and it would have done and the results would have been the same of knocking the ball loose. Aim his shoulder at the BALL and not Meyer’s head.

[Mace]

Stupid comment. Horrible comparison.

Well no it wasn't, but I sure expressed it like a jerk, and I do apologize, because you didn't by any means deserve that kind of response.