Started By
Message
re: FYI: The Full Text of the NCAA Rulebook Regarding Targeting
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:14 pm to Monticello
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:14 pm to Monticello
quote:
• A receiver attempting to catch a pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
This one, more than the others, is so subjective. Obviously, the WR is defenseless right when he catches the ball, but at what precise moment does he go from being defenseless to fair game? 1 step? 2 steps?
1
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:17 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
This is the 'out' that is going to bring a lot of flags. Guys better go back to the old fashioned facemask to the numbers and wrap up technique.
I'm sure that will be a huge coaching point of emphasis on every team, but the speed of the game is such that sometimes guys are going to hit a little high or lead with the helmet
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:19 pm to sarc
quote:
but the speed of the game
Definitely. When they show slo-mo's in the NFL a lot of times the facemask is going to the chest but the carrier moves, ducks his head, etc., then there is a flag. I don't know what the solution is.
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:33 pm to sarc
quote:
So a LB tackling a RB puts the crown of his helmet into the RB's side - ejection?
It will be a judgment call, but by the rule, yes. They can review to see if it was simply incidental contact or if it was a tackle designed to target with the crown of the helmet.
Essentially, you cannot use the crown of your helmet as the initial contact point like a battering ram. Even worse, this rule technically applies to running backs who lower the head and ram a defensive player with the crown as well, although I doubt that gets called nearly as much.
This play would now be a 15 yard late hit, then another 15 yarder for targeting, as well as an ejection for Fairley.
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:33 pm to Monticello
quote:
No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When
I just realized this would apply to a RB who lowers his head and makes contact with a defender. If the refs choose to enforce it, could see a lot of RB's ejected
Posted on 7/23/13 at 10:38 pm to sarc
quote:
This one, more than the others, is so subjective.
It's pretty crazy that the harshest penalty in the game is going to be used for what will likely be the most subjective and inconsistently enforced penalty as well.
I understand the 15 yard penalty, but the ejection is way too harsh on a first offense. That is saying that this:
deserves the same punishment as this:
Posted on 7/23/13 at 11:25 pm to Monticello
quote:
The refs are taught to throw the flag if they think there is any possibility it was targeting. They can then review the ejection part, but the 15 yard penalty remains even if the review shows it was not targeting and the player is not ejected. So you get a penalty for an overturned call.
Based on your post, you have obviously never taken a rules test or attended an officiating clinic
You can cut and paste, now go try to understand the rule you posted because you have no fricking clue....
Posted on 7/23/13 at 11:45 pm to arrakis
quote:
Based on your post, you have obviously never taken a rules test or attended an officiating clinic
You can cut and paste, now go try to understand the rule you posted because you have no fricking clue....
Straight from the NCAA rule book:
quote:
When in question, it is a foul.
Please elaborate. I cannot respond to something if you can't tell me what is incorrect about my post. And if I am incorrect, I want to know.
You an NCAA official?
This post was edited on 7/23/13 at 11:55 pm
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:16 am to Monticello
Start here:
I don't know where you get that crap, but it's crap.
When in doubt =/= Any possibility...not by a long shot
Then there's this:
Read 12-3-5f
Compare with what you posted. There is no "overturned call" because the foul contains two parts
The foul is for targeting (9-1-3,4 and Notes 1 and 2) which stands, the review is to verify the foul meets the criteria for disqualification. Replay can reverse the disqualification portion if it meets the criteria in 12-1-2. Again, there is no "overturned call" because targeting (a foul) is what initiated the flag
Yes
quote:
The refs are taught to throw the flag if they think there is any possibility it was targeting.
I don't know where you get that crap, but it's crap.
When in doubt =/= Any possibility...not by a long shot
Then there's this:
quote:
They can then review the ejection part, but the 15 yard penalty remains even if the review shows it was not targeting and the player is not ejected. So you get a penalty for an overturned call.
Read 12-3-5f
quote:
The point of initial contact and use of the crown of the helmet are reviewable; however, the targeting action itself is not reviewable. Note that if the disqualification is reversed the 15-yard penalty remains.
Compare with what you posted. There is no "overturned call" because the foul contains two parts
The foul is for targeting (9-1-3,4 and Notes 1 and 2) which stands, the review is to verify the foul meets the criteria for disqualification. Replay can reverse the disqualification portion if it meets the criteria in 12-1-2. Again, there is no "overturned call" because targeting (a foul) is what initiated the flag
quote:
You an NCAA official?
Yes
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:35 am to arrakis
quote:
I don't know where you get that crap, but it's crap.
When in doubt =/= Any possibility...not by a long shot
I will admit I exaggerated there.
But the rule does seem to highly emphasize throwing the flag for targeting, even if not sure it was targeting. quote:
Compare with what you posted. There is no "overturned call" because the foul contains two parts
The foul is for targeting (9-1-3,4 and Notes 1 and 2) which stands, the review is to verify the foul meets the criteria for disqualification. Replay can reverse the disqualification portion if it meets the criteria in 12-1-2. Again, there is no "overturned call" because targeting (a foul) is what initiated the flag
So we are mincing words, but I get what you are saying. My point was that even if the official determines on replay that the hit did not qualify as targeting for disqualification purposes, the call on the field stands for the 15 yard penalty. Seems like a silly rule to me. If you are going to spend all that time reviewing every targeting call for disqualification purposes, why not allow the ref to waive the flag as well?
quote:
Yes
Thanks for posting.
Glad you could clarify this for us.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News