TARGETING? Helmet-to-Helmet Contact?

[calismyhero]

T hey changed the rule this year to be the "apex" or the top. Not the crown and face mask anymore. And must be an aggravating factor.
Was a needed change as we had facemasks scraping unintentionally leading to ejections.

But this one still was a textbook targeting even with the changes. I just don't understand at all how it was overturned.

It’s this simple….they were not going to eject Florida’s best defender in the 1st quarter. I have watched a lot of football in my lifetime. This was a textbook targeting call. There would be no need to call a helmet to helmet personal foul as the correct call was the targeting foul. Not sure who is sitting in Birmingham but he’s obviously a Gators fan. Not getting enough airtime was the blindside cheap shot by #4. He should have been ejected, deserves to be suspended for that play. If Napier is any kind of coach, he watches that on film and suspends him. Geiger out for the year because of that bullshit.

 

[zjp3016]

T hey changed the rule this year to be the "apex" or the top. Not the crown and face mask anymore. And must be an aggravating factor.
Was a needed change as we had facemasks scraping unintentionally leading to ejections.

But this one still was a textbook targeting even with the changes. I just don't understand at all how it was overturned.

Where do you see that rule change? Crown of the helmet is the top of the helmet, and has always been part of the requirement for targeting against a non-defensless player. The only targeting rule change I can find for this season is that leagues can now challenge suspensions to a national review board.

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

Where do you see that rule change? Crown of the helmet is the top of the helmet, and has always been part of the requirement for targeting against a non-defensless player. The only targeting rule change I can find for this season is that leagues can now challenge suspensions to a national review board.

I misspoke. They changed the way the rule is enforced

The apex is defined as the top. The crown is the part of the above the facemask. They are trying to make it where they are penalizing the lowering of the helmet and not penalizing solid form tackles where the contact isn't intentional.

Its a good change but they blew this ones.

 

[fredmanthecatfan]

The reason it wasn’t called targeting is because the Spear wasn’t followed up with the Jack Hammer. Furthermore. No attempt at a pin. Therefore, the helmet to helmet was incidental.

 

[zjp3016]

Look...I've never liked the targeting rules....but since they are in the books and they apply to us...they should apply against us. That is only fair. The video and rule are posted below. You can't hardly make an argument that the rule and video are concrete examples of targeting. He hit Levis right in facemask and could have launched at his shoulder or abdomen or thighs. He intentionally went to the upper chest/facemask area. Will didn't last moment lower his head that caused it. It's a joke to pick up the flag and it's always a joke in this league how they magically do nonsense like this that goes w.o explanation.

View embedded media

Go to 2:01 of the 2019 game....why is one targeting and another is not? And the announcers in both are arguing to keep the UK targeting and not the UF targeting.

View embedded media

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

Article 4 says "head or neck area of a defensless player." It further defines defensless as:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

None of that describes Will's position. If a player is not defensles, than the person who makes the hit has to either hit with the crown of their helmet or launch themselves. In the 2019 game, our player lowered his head before making the hit. His facemask was facing the ground. That means he lead with the the crown of the helmet.

 

[zjp3016]

I misspoke. They changed the way the rule is enforced

The apex is defined as the top. The crown is the part of the above the facemask. They are trying to make it where they are penalizing the lowering of the helmet and not penalizing solid form tackles where the contact isn't intentional.

Its a good change but they blew this ones.

But do you have anything discussing that. The only thing I can find is a few years ago the rules comitee saying the refs where interpreting crown too narrowly (as only the top) and they wanted to expand the definition to include the are above the facemask as well. Which is more or less the opposite of what your saying, but was a few years ago. If you have anything more updated I'd love to read it.

NCAA clarifies rules on helmet-to-helmet hits

The NCAA has issued two new interpretations to guide how officials should identify targeting fouls, one of which is meant to clarify the exact location of the "crown" of the helmet.

www.espn.com

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

But do you have anything discussing that. The only thing I can find is a few years ago the rules comitee saying the refs where interpreting crown too narrowly (as only the top) and they wanted to expand the definition to include the are above the facemask as well. Which is more or less the opposite of what your saying, but was a few years ago. If you have anything more updated I'd love to read it.

NCAA clarifies rules on helmet-to-helmet hits

The NCAA has issued two new interpretations to guide how officials should identify targeting fouls, one of which is meant to clarify the exact location of the "crown" of the helmet.

www.espn.com

No, one of the in game rule analysts discussed it. Possibly in the Louisville game but I watched 5920 games so far so not sure.

Won't be any writing about it as its not a rule and most don't even know. It's simply the way they've been told to enforce. And it makes perfect sense.

 

[NCPurplecat]

Watching replay on SEC Network. Hit on Geiger was worse.. players have been ejected for less. Key catch was great. The PI was visible in slow motion but there was no evidence it wasnt a catch.

 

[wildcatglenn]

Article 4 says "head or neck area of a defensless player." It further defines defensless as:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

None of that describes Will's position. If a player is not defensles, than the person who makes the hit has to either hit with the crown of their helmet or launch themselves. In the 2019 game, our player lowered his head before making the hit. His facemask was facing the ground. That means he lead with the the crown of the helmet.

Difference in 2019 game was the UF QB lowered his head causing the H2H collision

 

[zjp3016]

Difference in 2019 game was the UF QB lowered his head causing the H2H collision

By the rules, if the defender lowers his head and leads with the crown, it doesn't matter where he hits. You can tackle someone in the ribs crown first and it can (and has) been called targeting. The fact the qb lowered his head has nothing to do with it as the defender is deemed to create the contact.

 

[UKat51]

I feel like a lot of people need to actually read the rules on targeting. There are two types of targeting and helmet to helmet is not always targeting.

Against a defensless player, helmet to helmet should be targeting, as any hit to the head or neck area of a defensless player is targeting. But Levis's position was not one of the listed ones for defensless which are:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

Against a non-defensless player, you can still be called for targeting, but you have to either launch yourself or lead with the crown of your helmet. The Florida player led with his facemask and ran through the hit. It does not meet the definition of targeting.

Most hits people say shouldn't have been targeting have a player leading with the crown of their helmet. If your facemask is pointing toward the ground, it doesn't matter where you hit the other player, it can be called targeting.

The Fla player hit Levis high with crown of helmet under the chin. Was not fasemadk to face mask. Upward movement caused Levis head snap and dislodged helmet. Please go back and rewatch the hit

 

[K_TIME]

Article 4 says "head or neck area of a defensless player." It further defines defensless as:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

None of that describes Will's position. If a player is not defensles, than the person who makes the hit has to either hit with the crown of their helmet or launch themselves. In the 2019 game, our player lowered his head before making the hit. His facemask was facing the ground. That means he lead with the the crown of the helmet.

Look...I get all your points....but the rule should not be this complicated.

- If Levis isn't defenseless....then who the heck is?
- Why this rule has so many areas of interpretation.....is exactly the problem. It leaves so much interpretation to the official. And allows them to call it one way then another way without much difference.

This is why it is best to remove all the targeting bullcrap that has made the difference in games. It's sort of ridiculous to decide games based upon who had a worse hit in game designed around hitting people.

 

[BigBlueManSouthCentralKY]

When studying the film the refs missed at least two pass interference calls on Florida that was pretty obvious. The defender on Key's TD had his arm wrapped around Key but no flag. And the slant, I think it was Magwood, the defender grabbed our receivers jersey and slowed him down from getting to the ball. No way they could have missed a jersey being pulled like that.

 

[BIGBLUEQ]

I misspoke. They changed the way the rule is enforced

The apex is defined as the top. The crown is the part of the above the facemask. They are trying to make it where they are penalizing the lowering of the helmet and not penalizing solid form tackles where the contact isn't intentional.

Its a good change but they blew this ones.

No, they didn’t. It was a good clean hit. The defender did not lead with the crown or the apex, the crown is NOT the front above the facemask. The crown is the top same as apex, same part of the helmet.
If this hit had been reversed and been called against UK, we would be saying it was a good clean hit.
There were zero targeting indicators in that hit.

 

[KillerKat14]

If that hit on Levis wasn't targeting then nothing should be called targeting. That was one of the worst helmet to helmet shots I have seen.

 

[BigBlueManSouthCentralKY]

Stoops said he sent his complaint in on the call but hasn't heard back yet. He said the refs sent the review in to the main office where a group of people review the play and decide what they think is right. How could a whole group of people agree on that? Said he can't comment on it when he gets their answer or he will be fined.

 

[Smashcat]

Stoops said he sent his complaint in on the call but hasn't heard back yet. He said the refs sent the review in to the main office where a group of people review the play and decide what they think is right. How could a whole group of people agree on that? Said he can't comment on it when he gets their answer or he will be fined.

 

[Wildcats1st]

View embedded media

Sounds about right for UK these days. Whether it’s why a guy didn’t play in a bb game or the sharpe debacle with no communication. Or the CRod and wright suspensions and now this the fans are kept in the dark while the powers to be hide behind “rules”. Everything leaks like a sieve everywhere else but UK. The sec owes an explanation to BBN not just the program.

 

[Catluv]

The whole thing on targeting is to keep players from getting brain injuries. They say in football players it is called c t e. I really feel like that UF player could of took down Will in a thousand different ways. He was untouched and could of hit Will in his chest, I really believe the rule was put into place to keep those type of hits out of the game. I think the refs are letting a lot of plays go now that have been called targeting.

 

[_ukcat]

I have watched the game replay and watched this play over and over. By rule it was a helmet hitting Will's facemask so targeting could be called but feel the main hit was at front of shoulder pads but a helmet did cause helmet to come off. So it seems officials this year might actually be looking at " intent" before making that call. Now the Roughing the passer they called on Fla. on UK's TD drive after JW's interception was wrong (IMO). I am UK fan and loved we got the call but Will was rolling out not in the pocket and the Fla. defender just made a tackle and didn't twist Will's ankle or do anything after the play that I saw that warrantied that call.