NCAA Targeting Rules and Bammer

In the Bammer/TAMU game yesterday the CBS guys both couldn't figure why it wasn't targeting on that player - I think his name was Noil.

Soon they heard from the SEC officials - Noil wasn't a defenseless player so it wasn't targeting.

CBS to their credit quickly had the rules on the screen. And what the SEC officials said was false.



"1) No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul.

This specifies a hit with the top of the helmet, but not necessarily a hit to the opponent’s helmet.

The next item in the rulebook, including the aforementioned "Note 1," which explains the many additional situations in which all kinds of hits are considered targeting:

No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

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..."

Okay, in both the UT game where Evan Berry was hit crown to crown by a Bammer player and the TAMU game where this TAMU player was blatantly hit helmet to helmet, clear targeting under the rule wasn't called.

The SEC office went out of its way (I am assuming they know the rules) to misrepresent the rules, which is pretty crappy.