What makes Williams particularly noxious is that he has "refined" his technique. When he grabs a guy high he then pulls himself up so that as the opposing player is going down Williams can hurl the full weight of Williams' body on the back of the opposing player's legs. Sort of an up and over technique.

I barely see the Cowboys play, and I have seen Williams do that same thing three separate times.

I remember Andre Waters and how he was regarded as something of a pariah. How does Williams keep from getting that same rep?

I'm a cowboys fan who watches every game at least twice... and I don't know that what he does is any more than just bad tackling technique. I don't think that he has any malice behind it. And I certainly don't recall him doing what you're describing. That might be why Williams is not a "pariah" as you say.

But I won't discount the fact that maybe I turn a blind eye to it. I like to think I'm not much of a homer, but the possibility is always there.

Yeah. As a Pats fan, I got to see it demonstrated (without even a flag) by Williams when he took out Ben Watson.

The more objectivity you give to the officials, the more problems you’re going to have.

Is there some new definition for "objectivity" of which I'm not aware?

Earlier this year Roy Williams was penalized for a Roy Williams rule horsecollar--for the first time in his career. He does it at least once every couple of games, often more often. It makes no sense that he never gets called for it.

#1: Most people don't talk about Williams' dirty play because they are too busy talking about his crappy coverage.

Also, there might be some other player on his team that likes to hog the attention.

I don't know that he MEANS to hurt people, but that's probably the result we're looking at again if it keeps up.

Yeah he does do it fairly frequently. But I would say its a bad habit or he's just not thinking, not that he's a dirty player. That would be Tom Brady.

Only kidding! I'll say Albert Haynsworth. I can never root for that guy!

As far the watson play, it wasn't a horsecollar. But Pats fans do have the right to be mad at Williams on that play, he certainly didn't refuse the opportunity to drive Watson into the ground with all his weight, causing the injury.

Matt:

I disagree. Again, I only see the Cowboys play 3-4 times a year and EVERY time I see them play Williams is taking a cheap shot. The move I described above I first saw 2 years ago. I have no way of knowing for certain but I SUSPECT that once Roy's coverage issues were exposed Williams sought a way to discourage receivers from giving their best effort. If a guy has to be concerned about a worthless c#cksucker destroying his knees I have a suspicion that might cause a receiver to not always be focussed.

And yes, if someone sees a Packer guilty of a cheap shot call him on it. The game has enough inherent dangers without some douchebag inventing ways to hurt his peers.

The ideal is the enemy of the good.

Saying that since officials can't catch everything bad that happens on the field in real time then it's inappropriate to review film and fine players after the fact for dangerous illegal behavior is silly.

We're talking about possible career-ending and crippling injuries. It's not linemen holding onto a jersey for a half-second too long and not being called for it. They're not jumping offsides and getting away with it --they're mangling people.

The only problem with the personal fines meted out this way is that they should add a zero to them. Then put it in a pool and set it aside for players that are crippled by horsecollar tackles. If the fine was $100k a pop, not $10k, our troubles here would soon be over.

The idea that you could be fined or called for unsportmanlike conduct for this is in the back of the players' minds. Way in the back, if you're a certain Cowboys DB, apparently. Knowing that the league is inspecting film of every game looking for it, and it came with a huge fine even if you managed to get away with it during the game, would put it in the front of their minds, wouldn't it?

I'd personally like to see the league get rid of in game penalties due to illegal tackling (helmet to helmet, horse collar, etc), and instead levy fines and/or suspensions after the fact. Things just happen way to fast for officials to be able to make a proper judgement. Here's one area where I like the idea of a post-game yellow card or red card for players who act recklessly.

I was yelling "HORSECOLLAR!" at my TV when I saw the Merriman tackle of Addai that's mentioned above, and I'm not surprised that they fined him for it. However, after the game I looked up the rule, and I thought the refs actually made a proper no-call. I have read both that it only applies to open-field tackles (see the wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse-collar_tackle ) and also that it applies to all tackles except a QB in the pocket and a RB in the tackle box (see http://profootballexperts.scout.com/2/556118.html about halfway down the page). Addai was clearly not in the tackle box, but he also wasn't really in the "open field," so it looks like maybe the refs and the league office are using different definitions of the penalty.

There is also a flash presentation from the Dallas News http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spe/2005/horse_collar_tackle... which talks about horse-collars, why they have such a high injury rate, and also some other "namesake" rules which I found very interesting.

Re: #9

It's not even so much the driving Watson to the ground with all his weight. It's that Williams grabbed Watson's upper body such that Williams could land with all his weight on the back of Watson's legs.

14. Hey, I know. But it's not a horse collar, and while I won't defend it as a clean play, I have a hard time believing that Williams does this on purpose. I really don't think he thinks "Hey, here's a great chance to punish this guy" when he's taking someone down from behind. I understand that guys think this when they're making those crushing hits like on receivers over the middle of the field, but I don't know the same thought occurs when taking guys down from behind.

I won't argue it further thoguh, because we could be talking about this back and forth forever ; arguing intent is notoriously hard.

Temo,
Intent is irrelevant. I don't care if Roy Williams employs poor tackling technique. I do care if his technique is illega, rarely gets penalized, and is responsible for disproportionate numbers of injuries to opposing players.

16. I completely agree. I wasn't the one who first brought up the question of Roy Williams as a cheap shot artist/head hunter.

I've seen a few Dallas games and Roy just has two things going wrong every time:

1- He is always behind the play.
2- He has horrible tackle technique

He is always behind the play usually because he sucks in coverage and they throw it past him, but it might be due to him staying near the LOS in run support.

Either way, he is running the guy down from behind, so he reaches up and grabs him. As far as I am concerned, there are two kinds of horse collars-- Flaggable and unflaggable.

They are identical in injury risk, but the only flaggable call is when you reach inside the shoulder pad to bring him down. If you just grab the outside of his shoulder and tug, thats legit.

Watson and Addai were both horse collared, and I yelled at the TV both times. That way of tackling is a huge injury risk-- just the fact that the guy being tackled is falling backwards onto his own legs with your body hitting them too-- it was what LT did to Theismann. Not horse collaring, just landing on planted legs from behind.

Cyrus, I think you're wrong. It's not how the player is grabbed, although Joe Buck and the rest of them prattle on incessantly about that very thing. It's grabbing the back of the pads or jersery AND yanking or twisting them down. I think Williams does "grab" the back of the pads or jersey a lot. But very few of the tackles are actually horse collar tackles. If he was truly doing it that much, he'd be getting fined for it. I'd guess the cameras are missing very few of these, even if the refs are. And I don't think they are, I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the rule because of the emphasis (by announcers) of where a ballcarrier is grabbed. It's not where he's grabbed, it's how he's brought down.

RE #19:

Well then if it is how he is pulled down, then they should call 10X more than they do.

Because I see it happen a lot, and each time I cringe thinking about what could happen to the guy's legs.

I had just passed it off as the rule only covers putting your hands inside the shoulder pads. Looking at the wikipedia link, it does mention "inside the shoulder pads" but then it goes on to include jersey tackles.

But, according to it, the times that I am yelling are legal because it is near the LOS. Didn't know that.

My favorite horse collar issue in a while happened in the Indy/KC game. Pollard dragged Addai down by the jersey. Two officials correctly kept their flags in their pockets. While approaching the LOS for the next play, Peyton Manning finds another official and says something like "That was a horsecollar, no?" And the official immediately throws the flag. That was a key play in the game, as it game Indy a first and goal from the 3 on a day when the offense wasn't moving the ball very well.

So while officials sujectivity is a problem, I think the even greater problem is when the players' subjectivity is factored into the decision to throw the flag.

I guess it really speaks to a larger issue, though.

And #19 is right on the money. A lot of times a defender will grab the shoulder pads and use them to drag a player down forward. And usually the talking heads remark that the player got away with a horse collar tackle and the fans get irate. But it's only a penalty if the ballcarrier gets yanked straight down from behind.

In addition, horse collar tackles are legal within a few yards from the line. I'm not sure what the danger zone is, however.

And wait...are jersey tackles now included? When did this happen? If so, I recant my previous post regarding Pollard's tackle on Addai.

I think jersey tackles were added after the first year.

Yep, somehow the rule expansion slipped by me...from a John Clayton article from March, 2006:

The committee expanded the definition of a horse collar tackle. Last year, the committee determined the tackling style of Cowboys safety Roy Williams and others was causing too many injuries. Williams would grab a player by the back of his shoulder pads, pull him down and fall on his legs, causing at least four serious injuries during the 2004 season. In 2005, though, only two "horse-collar" penalties were called. On Wednesday, owners voted in a change that will include grabbing the back of the jersey as a horse collar tackle. The vote was 25-7 in favor.

Horse-collar, helmet-to-helmet, hands to the facemask, etc...are we really watching football these days? The officials are way too involved in these games.

I always thought that the original horse collar rule missed the point. It wasn't the grabbing of the collar that caused the injuries, it was the yanking of the player to the ground in one direction while Williams' own weight went in the other into the player's lower leg area (eg the tackle that broke TO's leg). It has the same effect as deliberately rolling up linemen every chance you could get. Williams does it over and oever again, and part of the reason he gets away with it is because they legislated against the wrong part of the tackle. Yes using the shoulder pads as a grab handle to gain leverage is wrong, but he injures people because after grabbing them like that he twists them and lands on their legs.