was targeting call the key play

[HomerChampless]

I think the rules are clear cut. Lomax will sit until the 3rd quarter of the Pitt game (one full game suspension)

 

[CPHAWK82]

Game changed for Iowa after Rudock's pick. Refs in no way took this game from the Hawks imo. Hawks had breaks go their way as well.

 

[hawkfan340]

It was the correct call according to the rules.

The rule itself is terrible in that it leaves the DB in a no win situation where he is ejected even if he has no ill intentions. West's head was like two feet off the ground when they collided so there was basically no possible way for Lomax to tackle him without being penalized, and he couldn't really tell if the ball was caught or not until it was too late.

Again, correct call, but terribly written rule

 

[Camhawk]

It was a fair call. Here is a link.

Here is the section:

Contact to the head or neck area—not only with the helmet, but also with the forearm, fist, elbow, or shoulder—these can all lead to a foul.

Right or wrong it was the call. Next up Pitt.

 

[Sparky]

It was the correct call according to the rules.

The rule itself is terrible in that it leaves the DB in a no win situation where he is ejected even if he has no ill intentions. West's head was like two feet off the ground when they collided so there was basically no possible way for Lomax to tackle him without being penalized, and he couldn't really tell if the ball was caught or not until it was too late.

Again, correct call, but terribly written rule

It's not a no win situation. There is absolutely no purpose for Lomax to go in for the tackle the way he did. Tackle properly with your head up and your arms open instead of head tucked and arms tucked and you won't have a problem. It's called proper technique and the Iowa Dbs have been horrible tackling this year because they're trying to get the big hit.

 

[eveningnewsteam]

It was a penalty. You just cant do it. Tough call? Sure, but it's a penalty

 

[hawkfan340]

It's not a no win situation. There is absolutely no purpose for Lomax to go in for the tackle the way he did. Tackle properly with your head up and your arms open instead of head tucked and arms tucked and you won't have a problem. It's called proper technique and the Iowa Dbs have been horrible tackling this year because they're trying to get the big hit.

No, if he hit West in the head with his arms, chest, whatever, it is a penalty. If he wouldn't have led with his shoulder, it would have been less obvious, but he still would have done something against the rules.

Edit: Upon reviewing the rule, it does not single out chest or torso as something with which you can not tackle, so according to the rules, Lomax could have theoretically tackled without penalty if he would have used only his chest and not let his arms or helmet make contact with West's helmet. I submit that this technicality really has no basis in realty since that's virtually impossible to do.

 

[Sparky]

No, if he hit West in the head with his arms, chest, whatever, it is a penalty. If he wouldn't have led with his shoulder, it would have been less obvious, but he still would have done something against the rules.

Targeting and Initiating Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4)

No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)


If you dive at your opponent and intent to make initial contact with your shoulder or forearm you're going to get called. It's that simple.

If he would have kept his head up and went to tackle him properly we wouldn't be having this discussion because his chest would have been the first thing to come in contact with him.

 

[Hawknick]

Here is the primary reason why it was a bad call. Lomax did not initiate the contact. Lomax was going for the interception and the momentum of the clown reciever caused the contact. So the contact was initiated by the clown receiver, not Lomax.

 

[Sparky]

Here is the primary reason why it was a bad call. Lomax did not initiate the contact. Lomax was going for the interception and the momentum of the clown reciever caused the contact. So the contact was initiated by the clown receiver, not Lomax.

Your trolling is getting annoying.

 

[Hawknick]

Rude people are getting annoying.

Lomax said it himself that he was going for the ball. I am not making that up.

 

[hawkfan340]

Targeting and Initiating Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4)

No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)


If you dive at your opponent and intent to make initial contact with your shoulder or forearm you're going to get called. It's that simple.

If he would have kept his head up and went to tackle him properly we wouldn't be having this discussion because his chest would have been the first thing to come in contact with him.

Right, I tried to address this in my edit above. I think it is virtually impossible to tackle with your chest given the alignment of West to Lomax. If you are off a milli-fraction, you will end up contacting first him with you helmet or arms. It also depends on the meaning of "initiate". If "initiate" simply means that Lomax was the one that caused his helmet/arms/shoulder/etc. to contact West's head/neck, regardless of which other Lomax body parts first contacted West, then it furthers the impossibility of not committing an infraction. Also, the clause, "when in question, it is a foul" tacked on to the end of the rule continues to make it more and more likely that an illegal tackle is the only possible outcome.

Lastly, in the event that Lomax was able to just use his chest to complete the tackle, given West's momentum and lowered head, it is highly likely that Lomax would have been injured, possibly severely by such an approach. I could easily see him ending up with a cracked sternum or worse, in addition to West's concussion, from such a play.

 

[Sparky]

No, if he hit West in the head with his arms, chest, whatever, it is a penalty. If he wouldn't have led with his shoulder, it would have been less obvious, but he still would have done something against the rules.

Edit: Upon reviewing the rule, it does not single out chest or torso as something with which you can not tackle, so according to the rules, Lomax could have theoretically tackled without penalty if he would have used only his chest and not let his arms or helmet make contact with West's helmet. I submit that this technicality really has no basis in realty since that's virtually impossible to do.

He can use his arms to wrap the opponent. He just can't use his forearms or elbow to make contact with his helmet.

Honest question, did you ever play football? Did you ever go through tackling drills?

 

[hawkfan340]

He can use his arms to wrap the opponent. He just can't use his forearms or elbow to make contact with his helmet.

Honest question, did you ever play football? Did you ever go through tackling drills?

Yes, I played football (HS level). I ALWAYS tackled with my head up… see what you hit and all that. This is good fundamental tackling. However, sometimes despite my intentions, my arms or helmet would make first contact with the ball carrier since I didn't play in a laboratory and the other guy is moving too.

Also, as I said, I'm not sure that wrapping with the arms is legal according to the rule as written. There is ambiguity in the word "initiate", and the rest of the rule indicates that when in question the play will result in a penalty.

 

[Hawknick]

​

There is no proof whatsoever that Lomax initiated the contact. I have no doubt that he was going for the ball.

 

[hawkfan340]

Rude people are getting annoying.

Lomax said it himself that he was going for the ball. I am not making that up.

Lomax led with his shoulder well after the ball arrived. He may have said he was going for the ball, but that's not what happened. This much is clear.

As written, it was a penalty. If you want to contribute, find a scalpel and split hairs with me and Sparky about the validity of the rule.

 

[Hawknick]

If the clown had not slowed the momentum of the football it would have reached Lomax before the contact.

 

[hockalot]

This was the worse called game since the 2006 Outback Bowl, and possibly the calls that the refs did get wrong had an even bigger impact. Perhaps up to a 24 point swing caused by the referees. To you people that say that Iowa should have played better you are not necessarily wrong but this game should be team vs team, not team vs team + refs. Here is a short list of some of the worse calls in the history of college football.

On the play where the clown Quarterback pitched the ball to the clown. It was dropped, Iowa picked it up and was running it in for a TD. It was clearly not a forward pass. I had a perfect view of it since the LOS was directly across from my seat on that play. Everyone in my section saw it too. That should have been Iowa Ball, and a probable Iowa touchdown would have resulted.

Second on the first clown "touchdown" the clown receiver clearly picked the ball up off the ball. I once again had a great view of this. The replay also showed this. Everyone in the stadium saw this. Somehow it was not even reviewed. How is that possible. How much did the clowns pay off the refs on this one? Or were they trying to make up for bad calls on other games I don't know. However anyone who thought that was a TD was either blind or on the take. So that "touchdown" should be taken off the board.

Next was the phoney targeting call. Lomax did not launch himself, there was no helmet to helmet. Both players were going for the ball and they collided. There was nothing intentional about it! Anyone who thinks otherwise is on the take. This time they did review it but they still got it wrong. How did that happen? This allowed an clown drive to continue for an ill gotten touchdown when this should have ended in a clown 4th and long. This also unfairly took Lomax out of the game and this had a probable affect on Iowa defense for the rest of the game.

Later on at the end of the the Iowa field goal drive. Jacob Hillyer was tackled when he was going for the catch and there was no call. This was so obvious that the entire stadium noticed it at once. This would have been a first down, and could have helped lead to an Iowa touchdown rather than a field goal. It was just an awful no call. This is made even worse by the clear inconsistency that we would see later on.

This blatant inconsistency would occur on the final clown drive. Josey Jewell made less contact and later on the clown pass. Plus the clown pass was clearly uncatchable. It was as if the refs were trying to manufacture a way to keep the clown drive going. This would have lead to a 4th and 6 on the Iowa 43 for the clowns. A probable punting situation with just enough time for a potential Iowa field goal drive. Or at least overtime. However if the previous calls would have been correct it would not have come to this.

I find this favoritism sickening. I really have some problems with the refs, and I hope one of these years this gets fixed. Until this gets fixed I propose that Iowa discontinues the series with the clowns until they receive an official apology and a system is in place to keep this from happening again.

Next year we will have our Refs.

 

[Stanzi]

Butt hurt much? Why no mention of the picked up pass interference flag that was CLEARLY 3 yards down the field, not at the line of scrimmage as the clearly pro squawkeyes refs said. Yes, Squawk fans you were beat and outplayed and out coached. Accept it.

The flag was picked up because it wasn't interference. The targeting call was correct as well. I can accept the loss to ISU. Not sure ISU fans can accept the 8 or 9 more losses they have coming.

 

[David79]

The key call of the day was Iowa calling a stupid read option play with Rudock and Bullock on 3rd and 6 in ISU territory in the 4th when they had the lead. Throw the ball there and give yourself a chance for a first down. I they could have kept driving there I think it would have changed the momentum of the game back to Iowa.