re: I’m sure I’m beating a dead horse but that targeting ejection rule...

quote:

---

The rules guy explained it perfectly. He said the rule is you cannot hit an opposing player with the crown of your helmet anywhere on that guy from head to toe.

---

The problem with that is, if the Clemson player lifts his head, he would have made helmet-to-helmet contact. So he was getting ejected anyway. The only way the Clemson player is not penalized in that situation is if he tries to spin around and hip check the other player.

Similar situation towards the end of the Saints v 49ers game. A Saint DB crouched down and the 49er player ran into the crown of the DBs helmet. 15 yard penalty, no ejection though.

All I know is that I would have absolutely chewed out one of my defensive players for that hit. It was a spear and the head was down. Entirely preventable and exceptionally unsafe for the defender. I have sat players for doing that until they correct it (they are super young at 11).

The penalty sucks though.

And who in the HELL is going to make that determination. They can’t even get the. Alls right when the whole world is watching on the replay, and you expect someone to make an intent call. No way that’s happening.

Did you have the same narrative for Devin White last year?

Lots of LSU fans in this thread white knighting for the ejection since it went in their favor, but I agree with you. Make the call and apply a penalty for the hit, certainly. But the auto-ejection is stupid and out of line with every other penalty on the books. So if I grab a guy by the face mask and use it to tackle him it’s only a personal foul and 15 yards, but if I commit targeting, it’s that plus sitting out for an entire game? Doesn’t make sense. I’d complain less if they changed the rules to make every personal foul an auto-ejection than just singling that one out and making it worse.

We can talk about “teaching kids proper tackling technique” all we want but we all know the rule is there to protect the NCAA against potential lawsuits related to concussions. That is all it ever was intended to be.

They should change the rule slightly to not eject the player if the contact is not to the head.

quote:

---

I feel that the call needs to be there to protect the player but should be split into two different calls. One for malicious contact with intent where the rule remains as is and one for inadvertent contact with a 15 yard personal foul and no ejection.

---

Completely agree with this. Not sure why they cant do something along the lines of the NBA with a Flagrant 1 or Flagrant 2 foul.

What they certainly have to change is when a defensive player is clearly going low and the offensive player braces down in order to absorb the hit and there is an unintended helmet to helmet. Thats what I feel is the most egregious bc they will always hold the defensive player accountable for that.

Except he didn’t have to defy gravity to not spear the player he was tackling. If he hits with his face mask, he stays in the game.


And that dude was a fricking cruise missile out there.

quote:

---

Too me it is a BS call. I understand the rule but there was no ill intent and it is a contact sport after all.

---

He just did the most dangerous action to a players life in the game. How many players have been paralyzed because they lower their head just a little too much and their spines have been compressed/broken? That was the intent of this rule

quote:

---

for the safety of all players.

/thread

---

The targeting rule is a typical over-reaction by the NCAA. Very few times should a rejection ever occur. The targeting rule is akin to the dead aluminum bats in college baseball that we now see.

When players are going full speed, moving, juking, shifting, head bobbing, etc., helmet contact is going to happen, no matter if the player is trying to avoid it. Rejections for non-malicious/non intentional hits are ridiculous.

/thread