"Football"

QuadF said:
Helmet to helmet and his feet left the ground? Seems like textbook targeting call.
Click to expand...

Yeah there's no way to not call this with that launch.

The reality is that the targeting rules have changed the way players tackle for the better, and have improved the safety of the game.

That comes at the expense of disallowing some tackles that aren't especially injury-prone (like this one) and of course some outright bad calls, but overall targeting has been and continues to be a net positive for the game in my opinion.
 
andrew said:
The reality is that the targeting rules have changed the way players tackle for the better, and have improved the safety of the game.
Click to expand...
Is this true? Are injuries down since the targeting rule was implemented, particularly concussion-related injuries? I don’t know the answer, I’m genuinely curious
 
Ed Sawyer said:
Is this true? Are injuries down since the targeting rule was implemented, particularly concussion-related injuries? I don’t know the answer, I’m genuinely curious
Click to expand...

That is a good question and one I doubt there is any way to answer. Targeting wasn't implemented on its own, it was part of a general effort to increase safety which included actually checking for concussions.

Even just ten years ago the game was very much celebrating huge hits and players battling back after getting their bells rung, so I doubt there's any way to get reliable data on the true number of concussions before and after.

I do know that I wince watching a lot of older highlight reels and seeing QBs and receivers getting creamed, or DBs struggling to get to their feet after using their bodies as missiles. At least to me, anecdotally, those types of plays are gone and it seems like a good thing.
 
andrew said:
Yeah there's no way to not call this with that launch.

The reality is that the targeting rules have changed the way players tackle for the better, and have improved the safety of the game.

That comes at the expense of disallowing some tackles that aren't especially injury-prone (like this one) and of course some outright bad calls, but overall targeting has been and continues to be a net positive for the game in my opinion.
Click to expand...
That's not a launch, he just jumped straight up with his head up. A launch is when you use your legs to strike with your helmet, with your eyes to the ground, making your helmet more of a weapon. The only thing wrong with this is that it puts the QB at an added risk with a DL jumping and basically wrapping up his shoulders head. I would not call this targeting.
 
Targeting needs to be called on offensive players too. When an offensive player lowers his head while running straight ahead he should not be classified as defenseless. If there is helmet to helmet, throw both their asses out and alot of this will go away. Also, I don't think I've seen a runner called for a facemask penalty, though you see them grabbing it but always get away with it since it is considered a "stiff arm". The NCAA is broken and these dumb rules are prime examples. Don't get me started on the fake injuries that hold the game up for five minutes and the guy is back on the field after one play.
 
The Wasp said:
Targeting needs to be called on offensive players too. When an offensive player lowers his head while running straight ahead he should not be classified as defenseless. If there is helmet to helmet, throw both their asses out and alot of this will go away. Also, I don't think I've seen a runner called for a facemask penalty, though you see them grabbing it but always get away with it since it is considered a "stiff arm". The NCAA is broken and these dumb rules are prime examples. Don't get me started on the fake injuries that hold the game up for five minutes and the guy is back on the field after one play.
Click to expand...

I agree that targeting should be called on offensive players too but this doesn't aeem to be one of those cases.
 
QuadF said:
Helmet to helmet and his feet left the ground? Seems like textbook targeting call.
Click to expand...
No helmet to helmet and defenders' feet often leave the ground when tackling. It was called targeting because it was a hard hit.
 
The biggest problems are what the targetee is doing in the play and the oversized penalty. Many times the offensive player is lowering his head that results in head to head contact. The criteria has gotten so complicated it takes a two page checklist to determine if the offense is warranted.

The penalty should be reduced to something like 15 yards plus 5 game minutes in the penalty box. Make the refs track the time so they would think twice about calling the penalty in the first place. Better yet, just have the replay official make all the targeting calls.
 
ramblinwise1 said:
The biggest problems are what the targetee is doing in the play and the oversized penalty. Many times the offensive player is lowering his head that results in head to head contact. The criteria has gotten so complicated it takes a two page checklist to determine if the offense is warranted.

The penalty should be reduced to something like 15 yards plus 5 game minutes in the penalty box. Make the refs track the time so they would think twice about calling the penalty in the first place. Better yet, just have the replay official make all the targeting calls.
Click to expand...
I can get behind these ideas. Agree that it has gotten too complicated
 
OmnipoTech said:
Ok Magoo.
Click to expand...
I just rewatched frame by frame. The QB's left shoulder is facing forward, the DL is coming straight on, and the DL makes initial contact with his shoulder. Yes the helmets probably touched after that, but it's not leading with the helmet and it happens all the time.

Point of contact:
Screenshot_2021-11-17_18-35-38.png
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2021-11-17_18-38-35.png
    Screenshot_2021-11-17_18-38-35.png
    908.2 KB · Views: 19
Second screenshot there is on the way to the ground after the initial chest-to-shoulder hit. Helmets are not in contact.
 
RussianOffense said:
No helmet to helmet and defenders' feet often leave the ground when tackling. It was called targeting because it was a hard hit.
Click to expand...

RussianOffense said:
I just rewatched frame by frame. The QB's left shoulder is facing forward, the DL is coming straight on, and the DL makes initial contact with his shoulder. Yes the helmets probably touched after that, but it's not leading with the helmet and it happens all the time.

Point of contact:
Screenshot_2021-11-17_18-35-38.png
Click to expand...

Helmet to helmet is not required for targeting though. Here is one of the scenarios for calling targeting:

Launch — a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
Click to expand...

Your screencap definitely makes it look like the player has left his feet and is thrusting forward into the head/neck area of the QB.
 
Word is there is a clearer photo/video out there than the one presented here. Therefore, I motion to declare this thread a mistrial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top