Targeting?

[hawk4life73]

can anyone explain the targeting rule? On 3 occasions this weekend I saw the rule used and the player tossed. On none of these occasions was it a severe act.one looked accidental, one was Not to the head even though the guy's helmet popped off and the other was not malicious at all. All 3 reviewed and held up? What the hell is the rule and it's intent? I'll hang up and listen.

 

[uihawk82]

I would paraphrase the rule as using the helmet or leading with the crown of the helmet to the helmet or head area of a defenseless opponent. Not sure which 3 examples you are referring to but the Ohio St lbkr definitely used the crown of his helmet straight to the helmet of the Penn St receiver while the receiver was still catching the ball and not turned up the field and starting to be a runner (therefore defenseless).

The intent is to lessen the chance of concussions. I thought Mich Dee Lineman Bolden who was tossed was on a very bogus call because he was being blocked by an opposing lineman and he didnt seem to lead with his helment to the other players helmet.

Which 3 plays are you talking about?

 

[hawk4life73]

The 3 I saw were the Michigan game, the Ohio State game and Stanford. Michigan, how do you review that and kick the guy out? Same for Stanford game as the guy hit him with his shoulder. Ohio state game, while not blatant, I can understand. My point is that they take the tine to review these and in every case I can remember they kick the guy out when its accidental at best and sometimes the head to head contact didn't even happen. It's almost as if the refs don't really have a choice,.

 

[Bordone]

The 3 I saw were the Michigan game, the Ohio State game and Stanford. Michigan, how do you review that and kick the guy out? Same for Stanford game as the guy hit him with his shoulder. Ohio state game, while not blatant, I can understand. My point is that they take the tine to review these and in every case I can remember they kick the guy out when its accidental at best and sometimes the head to head contact didn't even happen. It's almost as if the refs don't really have a choice,.

In the Michigan game they either didn't see the linemen push him into the QB or because as he was going down he intentionally lowered his head to make contact with the QB (which is very noticeable on the replay). Also I didn't see the Stanford play but it doesn't just mean helmet to helmet. If you launch yourself at a defenseless player and hit their head they will probably call it.

 

[deanvogs]

I think the main components of the rule state that the player must be defenseless, and the player hitting them has to "launch" or "leave their feet" and make contact with the head. The launching is a big part of this. If you are tackling you continue to run through the player and wrap up.

People get confused, as just making contact to the head doesn't mean it is targeting. Take the hit by Lomax vs the Wisconsin guy that the Wisky fans were crying about the hit. He didn't leave his feet, and the player wasn't defenseless. The player had actually dropped the pass, and was in the act of dropping to the ground to avoid the hit, and therefore it wasn't targeting.