Bama’s Dial “Getting A lot Of Heat” Over Hit On UGA’s Murray, But Will He Get A Suspension?

It took the SEC a few days to suspend Ole Miss freshman defensive back Trae Elston for the Rebels' home game against No. 14 Texas because of a hit in Ole Miss' win over UTEP on Sept. 8.

After reviewing game tapes of Ole Miss' 28-10 win over UTEP, the conference deemed Elston's hit on wide receiver Jordan Leslie at the 3:18 mark in the fourth quarter to be "flagrant and dangerous." Elston led with his head and shoulder to hit Leslie near the goal line on an incomplete pass that sailed by both players. Just before UTEP quarterback Nick Lamaison's pass reached the goal line, Leslie pulled up as if to brace for Elston's hit.  Leslie was on the ground for several minutes before getting up.

According to a statement from the SEC, Elston's hit was in violation of Rule 9-1-4 of the NCAA rulebook.  "No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder," the rule reads. Also, Rule 9-1-3 states, "No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet." The suspension is in accordance with the SEC Constitution, Article 4.4.2 (d), which states that a student-athlete may be suspended if it is determined that the student-athlete has committed a flagrant or unsportsmanlike act.

And that, all of my Tide apologists, is why Mr. Dial should be suspended for the national championship game.  Why is it taking Mr. Slive and Co. so much time to do the right thing and announce their decision?  Dial's hit was a flagrant and unsportsmanlike act. End of story. End of debate.

All of the Tide apologists ignore a basic fact.  This was an illegal hit, it changed the outcome of the game and was made in a violent manner with consequential intent to knock the quarterback out of the game.  How else can you interpret what happened?  If the SEC consistently interprets and applies its policy, Dial should be suspended for the next game he plays - that would be the national championship game, I believe.  As I recall, he is a senior so this is the last chance for the league to discipline a player who flagrantly violated the rules.  While we can't "divine" what was in Dial's mind when he lowered his helmet and "The Boom" on Murray, he was, as most Alabama apologists readily admit, making a football play.  Anyone who has played football, especially on the defensive side of the ball, knows that your goal is to render the opposing player ineffective on that play and, if it happens, for the rest of the game.

That said, there should be no question that Dial gets suspended for the national championship game.  The fact that the SEC has waited this long to announce it's decision leads conspiracy theorists to conclude that they are developing some creative rationale, just like the Cam Newton decision last year, to justify allowing Dial to play in the NC game.  Dial was wrong, the play was brutal, there is no question from viewing the play that he intended to knock Murray out of the game and there should be no hesitation on the part of the SEC, and failing their action, the Alabama football program.  Of course, football is more important that breathing in Tuscaloosa so the chances of that happening are about as good as the Congress agreeing on tax policy.

It's fair to say that a penalty should have been called here.  There was clearly helmet-to-helmet contact.  It's also fair to say that Dial had no intention of hurting Murray or leading with his head as it's hard to tell from the replay whether or not he hit with his shoulder first.  To that point, it was in no way a cheapshot and I have no idea why people say otherwise. 

1.  The QB becomes a defender on a fumble/interception return so he's fair game to be hit. 

2.  Murray was in front of the play, not behind it.  He was also jogging towards where he believed the ball carrier might end up.  Should Dial or any other Bama player have allowed him the opportunity to make a tackle?  You don't know when the play is going to end when you're in the middle of the action.  You have to play until the whistle blows.

3.  It's still football and an opportunity to hit the QB when he's all of a sudden on defense is a part of the game.  You hit the QB in this situation for the same reason you hit the guy when he's just thrown the ball.  There's nothing new or barbaric about it.  Murray was not defenseless for this reason.

4.  If this hit was worthy of a suspension then why isn't the Georgia defender's helmet-to-helmet hit on AJ earlier in the game also worthy of a suspension?  That was a foul and the player led with his head.  AJ had just thrown the ball and was "defenseless" in the practical sense of the word although obviously not defenseless according to the rules.  Murray was not defenseless either as I stated.  The only difference between the 2 plays is that the flag was correctly thrown in one case, but not in the other.  The hit on AJ was NOT a cheapshot either by the way.  It was a play made in the heat of action, but was also illegal.  Same case for Dial's hit.

And no, I'm not looking at this through Crimson eyes.  If the situations had been reversed then I would not have thought our QB being hit in that sort of situation would be a cheapshot or worthy of a suspension.  I would have wanted a flag though.  That much is true.

Legal block.

To quote Jack Lambert, "I think we should put dresses on them".

1.  Why wasn't a penalty called during the game?  As Shaw admitted, it was an infraction that was ignored.

2.  Would that penalty have changed the outcome?

3.  If he is suspended, it seems a little unfair to UGA for having this type of review/decision AFTER the game.  In other suspensions, the player was usually ejected or removed from the game immediately.

4.  Just because it's the NCS game - if the rules say he should be suspended, it should be upheld.

There's a video showing a Georgia player gouging at the eye of an Alabama player.  Has McGarrity said anything about suspensions regarding this?

You can call it part of football all you want, but players and coachers in the SEC should know the rules.  A safety for Ole Miss received a 1-game suspension from the SEC for a hit on a receiver in the chest that was not flagged in a non-conference game earlier this year.  As Mr. Shaw has pointed out, this has been and should always be a point of emphasis for the officials.  We all know what is going in the NFL right now with the lawsuits over concusssions and traumatic brain injuries.   If you roll the tape you show above a few seconds longer, you'll see an SEC pinstriper come into view only a few feet to the right of Murray staring directly at this play.  Now either that official is completely incompetent, or this gives rise to the conspiracy theorists who say that the SEC will do anything to ensure that the millions keep rolling in and that Alabama goes to the NC game.  I'm not that venile or jaded, but something needs to be done about SEC officiating.  For a conference that claims to be the best in college football, more time needs to be devoted to the officiating product that is out on the field.

Alabama apologists will say it was just a hit and that is football, but consider the circumstances in the game.  If Alabama is penalized, they likely don't score the field goal.  Assuming everything else happens as it did in that game the rest of the way, Georgia gets the ball back and drives down the field for a game-tying field goal, is not forced to score a touchdown and has a chance to win in overtime.  This is clearly a case where a blown call - whether deliberate or not - affected the outcome of the game, potentially could have caused a career-ending injury and one where we are still waiting to learn whether the SEC will do the right thing and at least suspend the Alabama player for the game.

If you roll the tape in that game, Dial and his team mates were grinning ear to ear, slapping each other on the back and yucking it up on the sidelines afterwards for a clear helmet to helmet hit on a defenseless quarterback who was looking up field at the play.  In most other circumstances, it happens on offense when at least the player who is on the receiving end can lower his head.  Good thing that Murray spent some time in the weight room and had an extra good set of neck muscles.  Otherwise, the violence of that hit might have caused some permanent damage.  In this day and age, player safety and multi-million dollar personal injury lawsuits trump tired arguments about "it's just part of the game" and "winning at all costs."  We'll see if Mr. Slive and Co. have the courage to do the right thing in this case. 

i don't think anyone but Dial can define his intent.i also believe that one should look at his past record both on and off the field.Has he made this type of block a habit during the regular season or seasons past,taken bath salt type drugs,mugged or assaulted innocent people,thrown beer bottles across a parking lot and injured innocent property,and finally if we to use video to convict after the fact,how does one determine the intent of a block in the back or a chop block(i.e.-williams#54-ithink?at 13:13 in the 3rd? quarter.was there not a referee approx 5ft. from the block.Anyway,i tend to get wordy,i just think we should let those in charge of policing do their job.People like ESPN using words like hunted,dirty,cowardly,cheapshot should spend a few of their PRECIOUS resources to look at a man's overall character rather than drum up anger for their childish viscerated-vitreolic remarks for RATINGS SAKE.

It was a violent hit, but as a football play it wasn't a dirty hit.  You might can argue that Dial took the opportunity to "aggressively block" the QB where physics took over.  Dial (6' 6"/304) led with his right shoulder right into Murray's (6' 1"/210) chest.  The force of the hit snapped Murray's head forward into Dial's.  If that was a block on a punt return we wouldn't be having this conversation.  How many times to you see a wicked block on a return?  The fact that it's a star QB shouldn't matter.  The QB has to be aware that he becomes a normal player once the other team has the ball.  If Murray didn't know that then, I bet he does now.

i know enough about the rules to get me in trouble. But quick question i haven't seen asked.  If the refs would have thrown the flag, would there be reason to review for suspension? 

Here's my take (and I'm an Alabama fan, just for context):

1) Murray was not defenseless and should have either not been jogging toward the play or should have been paying attention. (If he's not "trying" to make the play, this is as open and shut of a case as there is.)

2) Dial was not using his head as a weapon and did not target Murray's head.

3) Dial did make contact with Murray's head. (I believe incidentally, but that's irrelevant).

4) The official didn't throw a flag, but a flag should have been thrown.

5) If defenseless vs. not defenseless is the main choice that decides a suspension, Dial should not be suspended. If the determination on whether the contact was initiated above the shoulders, it's a bit trickier, but I believe that Dial should be suspended. Intent is irrelevant. If the rule says you can't do it, you can't do it - even if you didn't mean to (and again, I don't believe he was trying to take a head shot. The way the hit plays out just doesn't add up for it to be an intentional helmet-to-helmet. He still hit him in the head, and that came first, but don't assume intent just because of result.)

For me, I think that if you look at everything, it's a violent play that just about everyone does. If the QB throws a pick and gets in the neighborhood of the return, you light him up. This is something that has always been. I don't believe that you have to protect the QB in this case more than anyone else, so I'm throwing that out. I'm also taking out the violence of the hit. If that hit goes off the way I believe that Dial intended for it to, it's legal, and no suspension would be legitimately on the table. However, since Dial hit him in the head first, you have to follow the rule. The officials can't miss that call, but they did, so whatever. Dial needs a suspension for no other reason than if you want to protect players (not QBs here, as I'd feel the same way if it were a lineman that he lit up) from head shots, you have to send the message. You can't be concerned with intent, you can't be concerned with the opponent in the next game, and you can't be concerned with how many more games he might have left in his career. If that's the rule, enforce it or throw it out.

If he doesn't get suspended, it will just confirm the SEC is selective in when they enforce the rule based on the team and upcoming opponent.

@MrSEC Murray not being in the pocket doesn't matter because Dial lowered his helmet and hit him squarely in the face mask. That's illegal!

Outrageous selective enforcement.. Ole Miss has a legit complaint.

It was a cheap shot.  It should have been a penalty and should not have happened.  Lester is correct in part, though, that this is football.  It does not warrant sitting a senior for the final game of his career, which also happens to be a national title contest.  The punishment does not fit the crime.