ThomasM
Retired from college football
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
- Messages
- 17,621
I hate it when the defender tries to go low and the offensive player lowers his head and causes the head to head. The defender gets ejected. Hate it.
forums
Do you realize how one non-call finally went our way...
- Thread starter Alaskan Cane
- Start date
Advertisement
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2025
- Messages
- 594
He's actually so fat lmao. That shot of him walking in front of his players out of the tunnel made me laugh
Salt
"Assigned species at birth"
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2015
- Messages
- 8,923
Personally I would draw the line whether tackler launched his body forward to determine intent.
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2013
- Messages
- 2,988
Yes, I broke this down similarly earlier this season. The rules are written incredibly poorly and in such a way that pretty much every big hit can be interpreted to be targeted. Make no mistake, this was intentional so that the NCAA can stick its head in the sand and cry willful ignorance in case there is ever a concussion lawsuit.
- - -
Most people don't know this, but there are actually TWO targeting rules in the handbook. The NCAA, etc., hasn't been clear about this at all. I'm a nerd who downloads the NCAA handbook and rulebook every year because I think it's important for me to fully understand this stuff if I'm going to criticize it. Some excerpts below...
Rule 9-1-3: Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet
No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet (aka 6-in. radius of helmet).
This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. -----> This is where aggressive teams (e.g., Miami) get screwed
Rule 9-1-4: Targeting and MakingForcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder.
This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul.
Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball.
Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:
• Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.
• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.
• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.
• Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.
Note 2: When in question, a player is defenseless.
Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:
• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play
TLDR: The rules are written so that anything and everything is targeting, and if the refs don't know if it is is targeting, THEN IT IS TARGETING!!!
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,811
while i hate it, that roughing the passer call was close enough to be called.
it SHOUlDNT be a penalty, but given the rules and how they normally call it, i understand why it was called. making it worse was Reed taking a dive. but it was just late enough plus the helmet to helmet contact to get called.
given that the refs coulda called a penalty on OJ and toure, im fine with 1 out of 3
it SHOUlDNT be a penalty, but given the rules and how they normally call it, i understand why it was called. making it worse was Reed taking a dive. but it was just late enough plus the helmet to helmet contact to get called.
given that the refs coulda called a penalty on OJ and toure, im fine with 1 out of 3
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,811
this is the worst for me too. i wish the refs would take this into consideration when calling these penalties
GirthQuake
Inner city recruiter
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2018
- Messages
- 10,031
Yeah that’s no where near close to targeting. The roughing the passer was a make up for the no call on oj federique.
hoops156
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Messages
- 30,549
The only one was the only one who always jumps offsides which is still mind boggling since blay ******* sits over the center so he can see the god **** ball
Advertisement
I've looked at it many times and don't think it's targeting based on the letter and intent of the rule. Now, the one that ACC refs almost certainly would have called on us was when we tossed the ATM ball carrier to the ground just out of bounds. ACC officials would have had the yellow flags out of their pockets in lightning speed on that one.
Far too often the "targeting" is purely incidental like that. I think you need to have clear intent, lowering your head, not seeing what you're hitting and using yourself as a missile.
Salt
"Assigned species at birth"
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2015
- Messages
- 8,923
That was OJ right? I think the announcers checked with their booth guy that comments on calls and he said that could have been flagged.
IMO it's borderline, how is a defender supposed to really know whether the guy is out of bounds or not? Defense is just trying to make a play, I hate those flags unless it's really egregious and obvious the guy's out of bounds.
Cookie917
Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 3,822
Yeah OJ not getting called was the bigger one for me. Seemed to just be agitated and tossed his *** and he had 2 feet in the white at that point. Easily could have been called.
The Reed flop I guess was payback, happens like you said, 50/50 on those calls.
However I am mad at you for bringing out the Lightfoot call again because now I am upset about it again, like he legit TRIED to hold him up the second he hit him, if he just ran through em and said F it, I get it, but you call unsportsmanlike or unnecessary roughness when he legit is trying to hold him up once he realized the play was dead.
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati
Senior
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2022
- Messages
- 4,275
I agree witht your first premise. I'm unsure on the second. There's something about watching a RB stiff arm a defender in the facemask that doesn't sit right with me. Same concept sort of applies here. When I see a RB lead with his head, why is that not targeting? Isn't the intent by the RB to inflict enough "damage" to get an advantage while sacrificing the safety of the defender? Again, I'm unsure. My inner DT thinks it is unfair to the defense which is probably really the issue I'm having. I think like a lot of things in life, it started out with great intentions and over time has sort of morphed into a wet fart of sorts. To be more (football) specific, I think the head hunting days of Jack Tatum, Gary Fencik, and Ronnie Lott, et al needed to end. When you see one of those bell ringer hits, you know it. However trying to legislate it into rule becomes challenging and having refs call it in real time even more so.
Sorry for the ramble....slower day at work so far (thank God).
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati
Senior
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2022
- Messages
- 4,275
Not sure if you're a hockey fan or not, but I've long thought the way the NHL refs handle the playoffs is as close to perfect as you can ask for from a fan's perspective (probably player's too). They don't blow the whistle unless it's egregious...and by egregious I mean it's a crime to not call the penalty.
Advertisement
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2013
- Messages
- 2,988
As I said above, the NCAA is NOT trying to legislate it into a rule.
They created two rules, VERY poorly written, with a TON of additional footnotes, in order to absolve themselves of liability in the event that there is ever a concussion lawsuit. If you look at the NCAA rulebook, it also begins with a bunch of meaningless bull**** about concussions. But if they really cared, then they would actually use those BILLIONS of dollars towards training, equipment, advancement, research, and more. But they don't. They had attorneys draft some crap rules to "show" that they were coming down TOUGH (!!!) on hard hits, so they can ostrich their way through, because that is how the NCAA rolls.