Targeting or not targeting

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
Aggiefever
Posts: 37
Joined: November 6th, 2010, 1:15 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 11 times

Targeting or not targeting

Post by Aggiefever » September 12th, 2019, 2:16 pm

I didn’t think that the hit was intentional but it was defiantly helmet to helmet. Based on the rule, I thought that the player should be ejected (I feel like his coach should have sat him the rest of the game because of his attitude after the hit). I would be fine with the ref choosing to not call targeting if they were more consistent.



User avatar
TheAKAggie
DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING I SAY
Posts: 5554
Joined: February 3rd, 2012, 10:21 pm
Location: Hyde Park, UT
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 168 times
Contact:

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by TheAKAggie » September 12th, 2019, 2:33 pm

Left feet, crown to the face, no idea why it wasn’t, other than they watched it in slow motion. I think all reviews other than goal line and out of bounds should be played at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hail Aggies!

User avatar
thegreendalegelf
Posts: 554
Joined: August 18th, 2017, 3:26 pm
Has liked: 280 times
Been liked: 103 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by thegreendalegelf » September 12th, 2019, 3:05 pm

TheAKAggie wrote:
September 12th, 2019, 2:33 pm
Left feet, crown to the face, no idea why it wasn’t, other than they watched it in slow motion. I think all reviews other than goal line and out of bounds should be played at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If we are going to stop the game, might as well get the call right and use slow motion.



User avatar
BigBlueDart
2017 FB Predict The Score Champion
Posts: 7890
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Syracuse, UT
Has liked: 44 times
Been liked: 185 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by BigBlueDart » September 12th, 2019, 3:27 pm

I'm going off on a tangent, but why are replay reviews synchronizing video from multiple camera angles? It seems like there is always one angle where you see the ball break the plane, and another angle where you see the knee go down. If those videos were synced the refs could easily know which happened first.
These users liked this post from BigBlueDart:
thegreendalegelf



sneed
Posts: 706
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 2:32 am
Has liked: 538 times
Been liked: 17 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by sneed » September 12th, 2019, 7:48 pm

BigBlueDart wrote:I'm going off on a tangent, but why are replay reviews synchronizing video from multiple camera angles? It seems like there is always one angle where you see the ball break the plane, and another angle where you see the knee go down. If those videos were synced the refs could easily know which happened first.
They refs do synchronize them to determine touchdowns / first downs etc.



User avatar
TheAKAggie
DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING I SAY
Posts: 5554
Joined: February 3rd, 2012, 10:21 pm
Location: Hyde Park, UT
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 168 times
Contact:

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by TheAKAggie » September 12th, 2019, 8:00 pm

thegreendalegelf wrote:
TheAKAggie wrote:
September 12th, 2019, 2:33 pm
Left feet, crown to the face, no idea why it wasn’t, other than they watched it in slow motion. I think all reviews other than goal line and out of bounds should be played at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If we are going to stop the game, might as well get the call right and use slow motion.
But they’re not always right. And when you slow it down it changes the way things look, takes the ferociousness out of hits, makes a wobble look like loss of control, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hail Aggies!

NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1723
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 72 times
Been liked: 38 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by NavyBlueAggie » September 12th, 2019, 8:58 pm

Targeting is many times a selective call. For all who have played the game at any level, consider the defender launching properly at the ball carrier. The ball carrier sees the impending contact approaching and drops his head to meet the oncoming contact. Between the tackles this happens on virtually every lineman or linebacker involved play.

Many times the contact is helmet to helmet and not spearing, as we once called that event. Certainly the blatant leading with the helmet to hammer the opponents helmet should be flagged, but how many times do we see a rocketing helmet to body tackle that doesn't get anything but oohs and aahs from the fans? Targeting needs to be defined beyond simple suspicion as far as I see the game.



pilotaggie
Posts: 488
Joined: November 13th, 2010, 6:53 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 8 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by pilotaggie » September 12th, 2019, 11:24 pm

TheAKAggie wrote:
September 12th, 2019, 8:00 pm
thegreendalegelf wrote:
TheAKAggie wrote:
September 12th, 2019, 2:33 pm
Left feet, crown to the face, no idea why it wasn’t, other than they watched it in slow motion. I think all reviews other than goal line and out of bounds should be played at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If we are going to stop the game, might as well get the call right and use slow motion.
But they’re not always right. And when you slow it down it changes the way things look, takes the ferociousness out of hits, makes a wobble look like loss of control, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One of the games I watched last weekend was talking about this. The announcer made it sound as though the refs had to watch it in real time at least once to see it again.



Full
Posts: 1696
Joined: April 27th, 2011, 11:07 am
Location: Davis County
Has liked: 87 times
Been liked: 46 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by Full » September 13th, 2019, 6:15 am



This is the NCAA training for the new targeting rule and it’s really good at explaining the new rule. I can’t say for sure what they saw, because I haven’t gone back and watched the game.



Usu0505
Posts: 378
Joined: March 12th, 2018, 6:51 pm
Has liked: 92 times
Been liked: 41 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by Usu0505 » September 13th, 2019, 7:13 am

The issue I had was the DB clapping after the hit while our guy laid motionless on the field. Their whole sideline seemed happy that one of our guys was down. Not classy at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
These users liked this post from Usu0505:
tysteve20



sneed
Posts: 706
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 2:32 am
Has liked: 538 times
Been liked: 17 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by sneed » September 13th, 2019, 7:47 am

Usu0505 wrote:The issue I had was the DB clapping after the hit while our guy laid motionless on the field. Their whole sideline seemed happy that one of our guys was down. Not classy at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He got a flag for that too though - they didn’t take that back because it wasn’t targeting.



Usu0505
Posts: 378
Joined: March 12th, 2018, 6:51 pm
Has liked: 92 times
Been liked: 41 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by Usu0505 » September 13th, 2019, 7:56 am

That makes it ok?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



bwcrc
Posts: 90
Joined: November 7th, 2013, 12:24 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by bwcrc » September 13th, 2019, 8:40 am

I was watching the Army vs. Michigan game last Saturday and a player was disqualified for targeting that I thought was bogus. It was only helmet-to-helmet because the offensive player was tripped up by another defensive player a fraction of a second before the player that was disqualified made contact with the offensive player. But for that, the player that was disqualified would have made contact with the offensive player around the numbers. The announcers acknowledged the there was nothing the disqualified player could do in that scenario, but it was a correct application of the rule. Based on that, I thought the SB player would have definitely been disqualified for targeting.

I get the need for the rule and I doubt most people would object to the purpose. However, application and enforcement of the rule seems to be entirely subjective without any consistency. That subjectivity and complete inconsistency are probably where most of us have a problem.



Full
Posts: 1696
Joined: April 27th, 2011, 11:07 am
Location: Davis County
Has liked: 87 times
Been liked: 46 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by Full » September 13th, 2019, 8:53 am

Usu0505 wrote:That makes it ok?
A unsportsmanlike conduct penalty means it is specifically not ok. I went and looked at the play. It’s at 33:50 left on the Facebook archived game or 11:55 left in the 4th quarter. Live action it looked like targeting. I don’t know how they didn’t uphold the targeting call. That looks like a crouch followed by leading with the helmet at an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact with the head or neck area, even though both feet are on the ground.



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1723
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 72 times
Been liked: 38 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by NavyBlueAggie » September 13th, 2019, 10:00 am

Usu0505 wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 7:13 am
The issue I had was the DB clapping after the hit while our guy laid motionless on the field. Their whole sideline seemed happy that one of our guys was down. Not classy at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Right on!!! No class and our guy was on the turf. Bush league and he did get a flag for Unsportsmanlike Conduct.



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1723
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 72 times
Been liked: 38 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by NavyBlueAggie » September 13th, 2019, 10:05 am

Understand the bit about leading with the helmet, but what else would he lead with? Honestly,,,what else would he anatomically lead with?
These users liked this post from NavyBlueAggie:
Cast Iron Aggie



Turtle
Posts: 101
Joined: December 11th, 2018, 7:10 pm
Has liked: 62 times
Been liked: 29 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by Turtle » September 13th, 2019, 10:36 am

NavyBlueAggie wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 10:05 am
Understand the bit about leading with the helmet, but what else would he lead with? Honestly,,,what else would he anatomically lead with?
Pelvis? That would make for some interesting tackles



User avatar
jeffdan25
Posts: 28
Joined: June 11th, 2019, 8:37 am
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 15 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by jeffdan25 » September 13th, 2019, 12:32 pm

NavyBlueAggie wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 10:05 am
Understand the bit about leading with the helmet, but what else would he lead with? Honestly,,,what else would he anatomically lead with?
Your shoulder. You never ever lead with your head these days. No ONE! teaches any kind of tackling head first anymore. If done properly outside shoulder to near hip tackles are the absolute most effective. Also prevents head injuries. Rugby tackle, Hawk tackle these are examples that everyone teaches. the head and neck should be completely out of the play.
These users liked this post from jeffdan25:
Cast Iron Aggie



hickaggie
Posts: 2832
Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 21 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by hickaggie » September 13th, 2019, 2:20 pm

jeffdan25 wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 12:32 pm
NavyBlueAggie wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 10:05 am
Understand the bit about leading with the helmet, but what else would he lead with? Honestly,,,what else would he anatomically lead with?
Your shoulder. You never ever lead with your head these days. No ONE! teaches any kind of tackling head first anymore. If done properly outside shoulder to near hip tackles are the absolute most effective. Also prevents head injuries. Rugby tackle, Hawk tackle these are examples that everyone teaches. the head and neck should be completely out of the play.
No, you aren't leading with your head but you are sliding the facemask to the side and all it takes is the runner cutting slightly or turning his head and bringing it down. And when you are firing out low as a lineman their are always gonna be some head several times a game as guy opposite you is going low and everyone guessing as to what gap and assignments will determine direction.

Targeting should be confined to extreme examples. In other words limited to the old rule of spearing before all the BS that's destroying the game. The worst part is the Defender almost always is the one punished. Lets get back to old school football. The defenseless player rule is the biggest bs part. If you don't intentionally spear, hit late, horse collar, grab the face mask or do something cheap after the whistle then everything else needs to be allowed. And don't get me into the protection of QBs, The NFL is almost unwatchable for that and college is getting bad enough.
These users liked this post from hickaggie:
Cast Iron Aggie



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1723
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 72 times
Been liked: 38 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by NavyBlueAggie » September 13th, 2019, 9:34 pm

Spot on Hickaggie and solid comments on a number of subjects!!!!. Insightful about QB protection techniques which get but little attention from the officials. Five stars for your observations. From High School on we were always tutored to never bury our heads in the other player. When I coached, the rule was to slide your helmet to the side of the player you were tackling.



User avatar
usugoalie13
Posts: 289
Joined: May 3rd, 2012, 5:05 pm
Location: logan utah/ edmonton alberta
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 3 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by usugoalie13 » September 13th, 2019, 11:21 pm

bwcrc wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 8:40 am
I was watching the Army vs. Michigan game last Saturday and a player was disqualified for targeting that I thought was bogus. It was only helmet-to-helmet because the offensive player was tripped up by another defensive player a fraction of a second before the player that was disqualified made contact with the offensive player. But for that, the player that was disqualified would have made contact with the offensive player around the numbers. The announcers acknowledged the there was nothing the disqualified player could do in that scenario, but it was a correct application of the rule. Based on that, I thought the SB player would have definitely been disqualified for targeting.

I get the need for the rule and I doubt most people would object to the purpose. However, application and enforcement of the rule seems to be entirely subjective without any consistency. That subjectivity and complete inconsistency are probably where most of us have a problem.
I watched that game too, frustrating to watch. The ruling was that he was knocked off balance so he became a defenseless player. How is the player that followed it up with a hit supposed to stop himself when he is already making the tackle when the guy is knocked off balance. I hate judgement calls, but targeting needs to be a judgement call.



User avatar
TheAKAggie
DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING I SAY
Posts: 5554
Joined: February 3rd, 2012, 10:21 pm
Location: Hyde Park, UT
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 168 times
Contact:

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by TheAKAggie » September 14th, 2019, 12:16 am

hickaggie wrote:
jeffdan25 wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 12:32 pm
NavyBlueAggie wrote:
September 13th, 2019, 10:05 am
Understand the bit about leading with the helmet, but what else would he lead with? Honestly,,,what else would he anatomically lead with?
Your shoulder. You never ever lead with your head these days. No ONE! teaches any kind of tackling head first anymore. If done properly outside shoulder to near hip tackles are the absolute most effective. Also prevents head injuries. Rugby tackle, Hawk tackle these are examples that everyone teaches. the head and neck should be completely out of the play.
No, you aren't leading with your head but you are sliding the facemask to the side and all it takes is the runner cutting slightly or turning his head and bringing it down. And when you are firing out low as a lineman their are always gonna be some head several times a game as guy opposite you is going low and everyone guessing as to what gap and assignments will determine direction.

Targeting should be confined to extreme examples. In other words limited to the old rule of spearing before all the BS that's destroying the game. The worst part is the Defender almost always is the one punished. Lets get back to old school football. The defenseless player rule is the biggest bs part. If you don't intentionally spear, hit late, horse collar, grab the face mask or do something cheap after the whistle then everything else needs to be allowed. And don't get me into the protection of QBs, The NFL is almost unwatchable for that and college is getting bad enough.
Yeah, these weenies. It’s not like we’re discovering the dehabilitating injuries occur after repeated hits to the head. These people and not wanting their brain turned to mush!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hail Aggies!

NVAggie
Posts: 15520
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
Has liked: 473 times
Been liked: 370 times

Re: Targeting or not targeting

Post by NVAggie » September 14th, 2019, 8:29 am

No, they just don't want lawsuits. They don't care about the players playing the game.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic