Started By
Message

re: New Analysis of Targeting Penalties

Posted on 10/22/18 at 12:42 pm to
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
66454 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 12:42 pm to
If that’s the first contact he made sure

He lead with a hand to the chest.

that photo means nothing.
Posted by narddogg81
Vancouver
Member since Jan 2012
19689 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 12:45 pm to
For lsu fans targeting can mean whatever you need it to mean. It's pretty magical
Posted by fibonaccisquared
The mystical waters of the Hooch
Member since Dec 2011
16898 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:14 pm to
For the people bitching about still images, video replays of both linked here: LINK
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:16 pm to
quote:

For lsu fans targeting can mean whatever you need it to mean. It's pretty magical


Or it can just mean what the rule states it means. In other words, not what Devin White did.

ETA: Also that the rule is applied logically. The entire premise of "Well, if you're not sure it's a penalty, it's still a penalty" is ridiculous. You shouldn't be ejecting players unless you're certain they should be ejected.
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 1:18 pm
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:19 pm to
quote:

For the people bitching about still images, video replays of both linked here:


Look at those damn LSU fans bitching about White! How delusional!

Wait, what?
Posted by fibonaccisquared
The mystical waters of the Hooch
Member since Dec 2011
16898 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:22 pm to
quote:

Look at those damn LSU fans bitching about White! How delusional!

Wait, what?


Not sure what the intent was here... I'm in agreement that the White hit didn't warrant an ejection. I'm in the Peter Burns camp 100%. Gimme a flagrant 1/2 style penalty where you can actually penalize players who go above and beyond what would be considered a normal football play while still penalizing the hit and trying to get *less* helmet/helmet collisions in the game. Ejections on judgement calls for a single play are ridiculous. Whether it's my team, your team, or a team I don't give two shits about. Just call it consistently and as close to fairly as can be done.
Posted by Adam4848
LA
Member since Apr 2006
18955 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:28 pm to
Which pixel is White?
Posted by Bayou_Tiger_225
Third Earth
Member since Mar 2016
10447 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:29 pm to
Targeting is defined as forcible contact to the head or neck area. Nobody can look at that photo of Wilson and say that wasn't forcible contact to the neck area. Even the Tennessee injury report said a hurt clavicle.
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:30 pm to
quote:

Not sure what the intent was here... I'm in agreement that the White hit didn't warrant an ejection.


The intent was to make fun of all the mouth breathers saying it's just LSU fans complaining about this call.

It's not. It's being talked about nationally.

ETA: I'm not saying you're one of them. Just using the article you posted as proof.
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 1:31 pm
Posted by TailbackU
ATL
Member since Oct 2005
11089 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:54 pm to
quote:

should have went


to english class
Posted by fibonaccisquared
The mystical waters of the Hooch
Member since Dec 2011
16898 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 1:55 pm to
Just making sure. We've gone toe to toe once or twice before. Usually it is at least for actual disagreement though...
Posted by narddogg81
Vancouver
Member since Jan 2012
19689 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:04 pm to
quote:

Or it can just mean what the rule states it means. In other words, not what Devin White did.
he left his feet, he hit a defenseless player, he hit hit in the head and neck area (doesn't have to be helmet or crown of helmet). Sorry bro, that some pussy targeting, but it's technically correct. Which is the best kind of correct
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

he left his feet


Incorrect.

quote:

he hit a defenseless player


Does not constitute targeting.

quote:

he hit hit in the head and neck area (doesn't have to be helmet or crown of helmet).


Incorrect.

quote:

Sorry bro, that some pussy targeting, but it's technically correct. Which is the best kind of correct


Nothing you posted is even technically correct.

Solid contribution.
Posted by JuiceTerry
Roond the Scheme
Member since Apr 2013
40868 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:08 pm to
quote:

n the Tennessee injury report said a hurt clavicle.
Mack Wilson made a textbook tackle

When did the clavicle become part of the head or neck?
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:11 pm to
quote:

When did the clavicle become part of the head or neck?


If the chest (Where White made contact) is part of the head or neck area, as so many Bama fans have claimed, the clavicle certainly is. The clavicle sits above the chest.

***To be clear I'm saying neither is targeting. Before I get accused of being a homer by another Bama fan saying only White's was. Again.
Posted by narddogg81
Vancouver
Member since Jan 2012
19689 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:12 pm to
quote:

quote:
he left his feet


Incorrect.


He did
quote:

quote:
he left his feet


Incorrect.

it's the major determing factor


quote:

quote:
he hit hit in the head and neck area (doesn't have to be helmet or crown of helmet).


Incorrect.

Sorry but that's the rule
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)
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:14 pm to
quote:

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)


I know the rule. White didn't break it.


quote:

He did


How does one "leave their feet" only to continue to run through the player? Physics don't really mesh there.

quote:

it's the major determing factor


Defenseless player has to apply for targeting to be considered. Defenseless player does not determine whether is was targeting.

There is a difference.
Posted by Hugh McElroy
Member since Sep 2013
17379 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:38 pm to
quote:

I am. The crown of White's helmet isn't anywhere near Fitz.

Next question, do you actually know what the crown of a helmet is?


Apparently, you don't. In regards to targeting, the crown is considered anything above the facemask.
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
43811 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:42 pm to
quote:

Apparently, you don't. In regards to targeting, the crown is considered anything above the facemask.


So the crown of the helmet starts at the player's eyebrows? Yeah, I'll stick with the actual definition of crown. You know, the top.
Posted by JuiceTerry
Roond the Scheme
Member since Apr 2013
40868 posts
Posted on 10/22/18 at 2:50 pm to
Serious question.. Who fills in for White?
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter