Legal, but unnecessary

There was alot of talk leading up to Thursday's Bengals-Steelers game around the possibility of retribution. In the teams' first meeting on October 19th, Steelers wide receiver Hines Ward broke the jaw of Bengals rookie linebacker Keith Rivers. Rivers is now on IR (meaning, he's out for the year). No penalty was called; no fine imposed. Hines Ward is known as one of the toughest players at his position, if not in the entire NFL. If you're his teammate or a Steeler fan, you love him. Most everyone else feels otherwise. Ward's hit was deemed "legal" according to NFL rules, and that's not really the issue. Here's the video - unfortunately it's not great, but you get the idea.

So yes, I can agree that according to NFL rules, it is a legal hit. But why is that legal?? Every so often I read a player or writer talk about how the NFL going soft. Based on my own empirical research, I will say that more penalties are called now for unsportsmanlike conduct, roughing the passer, etc. Defensive players sometimes complain that they are worried about not drawing a penalty instead of simply making the play. I understand that there's an element of ferocity to the game that makes it what it is, and I understand why some players claim the league is "softer" than it used to be. But when players are unnecessarily getting their jaws broken on a play that was fully intentional (meaning that Hines Ward fully intended to legally block Keith Rivers by hitting him as hard as he can - I'm not implying that he intended to break his jaw), doesn't that indicate a problem?

Couldn't Ward have made a perfectly effective block without lowering his shoulder and leveling an unsuspecting Rivers? Rivers was pursuing the ball, paying no attention to potential blockers coming from down field (nor should he be). This play is seen all the time in football, most often during punt or interception returns. A player pursuing the ball carrier is blindsided by someone coming in to block him. This makes for great highlights on SportsCenter, but what about when a player's season is ended? This is a specific instance where a rule could be instated without changing the nature of the game. Conversely, if a defensive back levels a receiver as he attempts to catch the ball, jarring the ball free, this is a "necessary" play. If the defensive player doesn't hit the receiver as hard as he can and the receiver catches the ball, the defensive player is doing himself and his team a disservice. Of course, there are rules protecting the receiver, such as no helmet to helmet contact, but further limiting what the defender can do in this situation would certainly change the game. That is not the case with the Ward/Rivers play.

Isn't there a penalty called "unnecessary roughness"? I would propose that a play that breaks a player's jaw, when the exact same football outcome could have been achieved through other, less violent means, be deemed unnecessary.

**********
Please note: this post has nothing to do with my disdain for Hines Ward, which was nothing to do with the fact that I despise the Steelers.