Started By
Message
re: Targeting rule good or bad...
Posted on 5/22/20 at 10:10 am to UnoMe
Posted on 5/22/20 at 10:10 am to UnoMe
The rule is fine as-is it just needs to be called on offensive players too.
Basically when helmet-to-helmet contact occurs the replay booth should make a determination on which player holds responsibility. I’ve seen a few calls where the tackling player was going for an otherwise clean tackle only to be called for targeting because the RB gave him a headbutt at the last second. I’d imaging some coaches are instructing RBs to try to draw targeting calls tbh.
As far as the ejection, maybe there does need to be some provision for leniency in freak situations, but the severe penalty is there to drive home to the players (and viewers) that safety is important to the collegiate variant of the game. Too much wiggle room would defeat the purpose.
Basically when helmet-to-helmet contact occurs the replay booth should make a determination on which player holds responsibility. I’ve seen a few calls where the tackling player was going for an otherwise clean tackle only to be called for targeting because the RB gave him a headbutt at the last second. I’d imaging some coaches are instructing RBs to try to draw targeting calls tbh.
As far as the ejection, maybe there does need to be some provision for leniency in freak situations, but the severe penalty is there to drive home to the players (and viewers) that safety is important to the collegiate variant of the game. Too much wiggle room would defeat the purpose.
This post was edited on 5/22/20 at 10:14 am
2
Posted on 5/22/20 at 12:38 pm to PlateJohnsonIII
quote:
I’ve seen a few calls where the tackling player was going for an otherwise clean tackle only to be called for targeting because the RB gave him a headbutt at the last second. I’d imaging some coaches are instructing RBs to try to draw targeting calls tbh.
I see thus more with receivers and QBs lowering their bodies to brace for a hit, which causes the defensive player (who's already committed) to make an impossible play of getting even lower to make a "clean" tackle. With them also changing the rules to disallow hits below the knees (where we've also seen penalties called for hits to the hip or thigh), the rules have shrunk the tackling zone to something that really isn't feasible in a lot of instances. Essentially, these new rules for "player safety" have resulted in there being plays throughout a game where you have to make the choice of simply letting not hitting the offensive player or get called for a penalty and possibly ejected. It's a violent sport. You can only protect players so much. But at the end of the day, the players know what they signed up for at this point. There is no longer the ignorant card they can pull that they didn't know head injuries may be prevalent in football and cause long-lasting damage.
This post was edited on 5/22/20 at 12:41 pm
Posted on 5/22/20 at 12:46 pm to PlateJohnsonIII
quote:
I’ve seen a few calls where the tackling player was going for an otherwise clean tackle only to be called for targeting because the RB gave him a headbutt at the last second. I’d imaging some coaches are instructing RBs to try to draw targeting calls tbh.
Running backs are not defenseless players and it's very rare that any such targeting calls should be called when tackling such players.
What you are seeing are refs who don't understand the rules.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News