[CTcard]

[quote author=oldalum link=topic=15760.msg173554#msg173554 date=1475028643]According to the LA Times, the league has "affirmed" the non-call but says the rule will be discussed further in the off-season.

If that isn't covered by the rule then the rule needs to change. Grotesquely irresponsible hit.
[/quote]

Unless hidden somewhere in the rulebook there is a definition of "crown" that explicitly states it only includes the absolute top point of the helmet and no more, then that hit was absolutely covered by the rule.

There is even less technical question about the hit on Schultz (a defenseless player by definition) and on Burns (the absolute top point of the helmet used), though those were overall less severe and less dangerous.

I can only conclude that the Pac-12 office is more concerned about protecting their referees than their players.

[CTcard]

[quote author=oldalum link=topic=15760.msg173554#msg173554 date=1475028643]According to the LA Times, the league has "affirmed" the non-call but says the rule will be discussed further in the off-season.

If that isn't covered by the rule then the rule needs to change. Grotesquely irresponsible hit.
[/quote]

Unless hidden somewhere in the rulebook there is a definition of "crown" that explicitly states it only includes the absolute top point of the helmet and no more, then that hit was absolutely covered by the rule.

There is even less technical question about the hit on Schultz (a defenseless player by definition) and on Burns (the absolute top point of the helmet used), though those were overall less severe and less dangerous.

I can only conclude that the Pac-12 office is more concerned about protecting their referees than their players.