The difference is, safety. How often do jaywalkers get struck ? It sure isn’t called consistently enough but they had time to review it and made the right call according to the rules.
Yahoo Sports Slams "Targeting" Call
- Thread starter NotInRHouse
- Start date
Exactly. And that's what is so annoying. I watch way too much football and I honestly don't recall ever seeing that kind of play flagged.
But that’s also the problem with the way the targeting rule is enforced. We all understand that the rule is in place to try to make football safer. But it’s also true to note that hits like Powell made against Carter happen very frequently during football games and are not flagged. Some more judiciousness from officiating crews — especially on big plays like this — is needed for the sake of consistency."
Rutgers' Tyreem Powell ejected after controversial targeting call on a fourth-down stop
Powell stopped Michigan State RB Nate Carter in the backfield but apparently didn't tackle correctly.sports.yahoo.com
I would love GS to cop the fine and just slam these clown officials. It really does seem like it's getting worse and worse with each game.
Even the MSU fans on their board said the call was BS. They were quite happy about how much the refs were on their side.
If that play gets called by the rule by every ref in every game- games would take 5 hours and you better have a really good 3 deep. That hit happens on almost every single short yardage play into a pile. There is a reason both lines are taught to be the one that gets lower.
and I think I will take the opinion of a skoolie over most anyone else on this play.
FYI - Syracuse lost. Take it up on your own board
Right. I agree it’s not consistently called, just like there’s OL holding on every play. But it’s the rule and after the lengthy review they aren’t going to just make shit up. It’s a penalty whether they call it other times or not.
Strangely enough they were doing it in our house.
What other team gets a homer job done to them (at least in the first half) in their own home ?
In no way did that look like targeting. I mean we're talking about the split of a split of a second in that violent contact, and it almost appears Powell was trying to get his helmet down to the RBs pad level and avoid helmet to helmet.
It’s got nothing to do with helmet to helmet. Initiating contact with the crown of the helmet on a tackle is a no-no, no matter where it lands. Same reason the sideline hit on Wimsatt call last week was reversed. The UW tackler turned his head and hit first with shoulder pads.
That’s not a textbook tackle. You’re supposed to see what you hit, head up. Our guy hit with the crown, looking down.
They reviewed and it was clear.
That’s not a textbook tackle. You’re supposed to see what you hit, head up. Our guy hit with the crown, looking down.
They reviewed and it was clear.
BTN staff on the Final Drive said it was questionable and all chuckled
They all know that hit never gets flagged on B1G blue bloods Mich, tOSU, etc.
I'm watching my DRV of the game right now as it is more interesting then the NFL- On the targeting play.
Runner is running up the middle- Powell comes in and does lower his head- aimed directly at the RB's chest. Last 2nd, almost immediately after Powell's head goes down- RB lowers his head and it is really his facemask that comes down on Powell's crown just as Powell's front of helmet is making contact with the RB chest.
If RB does not lower his head, Powell would have planted the very front of his helmet into the kids chest.
The series on offense that we tried the long fG was a crime too. They had at least 1 offsides, the obvious facemask- and it was the 15 yd type of facemask and the hit on Dremel.
I also have to give MST some credit on first 2 drives on great pre game coaching with having their QB running. We obviously were not looking for it. And then credit goes right back to our coaches who saw it and adjusted.
It was an iffy call and if it wasn't called no one would have questioned it. The officials themselves delayed throwing the flag. Even WhiteBus wouldn't claim it was targeting if it wasn't called.
Very true and Powell's helmet contact appeared more like glancing off the MSU RB's facemask. Of course, helmet contact is fairly ubiquitous across the sport. Some incidental, some intentional. Though not always with the top/crown. Helmets were introduced for safety but maybe most players tend to think it's not just protective but can also help deliver a hit? Would they tackle quite the same way if not wearing any headgear/facemask or only a rugby skullcap? Likely a few more broken noses for out-of-form or inadvertent facial contact.
Leading with crown may have some merit to it (or was it technically more of his brow than the crown?) as it looks like Powell's lowering head dipped his face down just before impact, perhaps inadvertently, and could result in himself being injured.
I suppose with face/chin up and neck snapping back (vs. getting compressed back in the face/chin down scenario) can result in serious injury as well, but perhaps just not as severe?
Gef I'm not arguing the technique. If you were (re)writing the rulebook would Powell be ejected for that stop?
Technically he lead with the crown of his helmet. If it was called in the moment I can deal with it, the review is iffy to me.
If I had a player hit with the crown of another players helmet to his helmet I would be on the officials to do something about it. Especially in the upward motion.
I do not think it was intentional at all, he just got crazy low and exploded through. If he goes eyes up peck to peck it doesn't happen. Do what you're told to do and good things happy.
You know a million times more about this than I do, but I look at the hit again and again, and I just cannot see Powell could have done to avoid any helmet-to-helmet contact. He and the ball carrier are coming at each other full speed -- it seems to me there just isn't time for Powell to get into perfect tackling position and to anticipate what the ball carrier is going to do. I don't think hits like this can be avoided without radically changing the sport.
Remember this is happening extremely fast. The rb ducked and shifted his body at the same time. He very well could have attempting to put his shoulder in the rbs chest..he's also 6'5
Yes all of that is true but irrelevant to the rule. intent doesn’t matter and either does ballcarrier movement. It’s an illegal tackle by rule. Just because it’s the only way to shoot the gap and stuff the run it’s still illegal. First contact can’t be with crown of helmet, period. Rules are rules.
Think about facemask penalties. Doesn’t matter if intentional or if the ball carrier turns head and catches defenders fingers. A penalty, period. No exceptions. Same with crown of helmet hits. No nuance.
Last edited:
Yeah, just explaining why it's a tough call...the rb out his head in the line of fire...this happens in games all the time, I've never seen this type of play called targeting. Last wee the refs reviewed a hit on Gavin that looked more like targeting than this one and decided it wasn't targeting. Seems unfair
Agree that’s it’s not called consistently but it is the rule.
I disagree about the UW hit on Wimsatt. First contact with right shoulder while in bounds. And replay didn’t show any helmet contact anyway. They overturned, correctly.
The really bad call was the play before that when GW got shoved down after already being out of bounds.
I disagree about the UW hit on Wimsatt. First contact with right shoulder while in bounds. And replay didn’t show any helmet contact anyway. They overturned, correctly.
The really bad call was the play before that when GW got shoved down after already being out of bounds.
I double checked this year’s rulebook to make sure I wasn’t talking out of my ass. It’s here in case anyone else wants to review: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4669-2023-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
I double checked this year’s rulebook to make sure I wasn’t talking out of my ass. It’s here in case anyone else wants to review: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4669-2023-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
Like many here, I think the targeting rule has gone overboard. Especially when protecting the QB in the NFL. A lineman literally can’t land on a QB after sacking them. They must somehow make the sack and then contort their body sideways to keep their full weight off the QB. Injuries are part of the game and players know what they’re signing up for. I think it’s gone too far.
The penalty referenced above is a different story though. It probably should have a different name. But out of all fans in college football, we should understand why the rule exists. Today is the 13th anniversary of Eric Legrand’s injury. SIAP, but I’m surprised there haven’t been any threads. I didn’t want to start my own and mention anything even remotely negative, which is why I’m keeping this here.
There’s a reason college football doesn’t want players lowering their head and the reason is Eric. IMHO, I think most of us should be ok watching games that aren’t the same level of contact as 20 years ago if it prevents even one kid from being paralyzed.
There’s an inherent level of risk in the game, but players aren’t signing up to never walk again. Just my opinion.
I double checked this year’s rulebook to make sure I wasn’t talking out of my ass. It’s here in case anyone else wants to review: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4669-2023-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
As far as Saturday, there’s an interesting twist to the rule. It’s guilty until proven innocent if called on the field. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
The quirk is when it’s not called on the field. The instant replay official can “throw” the flag, but in that case, it flips to innocent until proven guilty.
Clearly, that’s what happened against MSU (unless I missed the flag on the field). If the tackle had been on a 1st down during a hurry up offense, it probably doesn’t get called, and it makes SportsCenter Top 10.
Unfortunately for us, it was a turnover on downs, followed by a big celebration, that went into a TV timeout.
Last edited:
I think it is an awesome fit, awesome read, and explosive play. At the last second he drops his head. His head was not down when he came through the line, all he has to do is keep his eyes up and there is no potential for a penalty. Even if he goes facemask to facemask there is little to no chance of a penalty.
He didnt do what he was coached to do and he lead with the crown of his helmet (which is not safe for his own life). Live and learn and move on.
This. The ejection should be discretionary based on intent like the difference between flagrant 1 and 2 in basketball.
The refs were correct. And yes it’s the name of the penalty itself which leads to the incorrect interpretation of requiring intent.I double checked this year’s rulebook to make sure I wasn’t talking out of my ass. It’s here in case anyone else wants to review: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4669-2023-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
I haven't read this thread in any detail, but I saw the constant replays at the stadium and just looked at the video at the start of this thread. Sure looks like targeting to me. Not intentional, maybe bad circumstantial luck. But targeting.
Looking at that pic, could you imagine how dangerous that tackle would have been if the RU plyer bent his head back in an effort to avoid a targeting call? He'd have broken his neck. He's clearly going for the RB's legs and waist in a classic tackle. There was just no other way for the LB to make a normal tackle, and nowhere else for him to put his head, given the quickness of the play and the angles. Like every other rule, the officials use a ton of discretion or the games would take forever and be unwatchable. They need to use similar common sense here.I double checked this year’s rulebook to make sure I wasn’t talking out of my ass. It’s here in case anyone else wants to review: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4669-2023-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
Many in this thread are getting hung up on the word targeting. There are essentially 5 flavors of targeting. Most protect the offense/ball carrier, but one protects the health of the tackler.
For the last, the offensive player doesn’t matter in any way. It could be a QB blindsided 5 seconds late helmet to helmet. It could be a 1-1 open field tackle on a running back’s legs. Again, the offense plays no part in this penalty. Any discussion of the ballcarrier is irrelevant here.
Players can’t lower their head while tackling and make any contact with the crown of their helmet. This was clarified in last year’s rulebook to specifically be a circle at the top of the helmet with a 12” diameter.
It’s a black and white rule with no exceptions. Guilty until proven innocent. Refs are instructed to throw the flag if it’s even borderline.
Here’s the pic from OP’s article:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UDKrByB8uph9UrYMHT.JUg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-10/98dff3f0-6ab6-11ee-bce5-5ce5d6798d9f
Those are the straight facts on the penalty. I’ll post my opinion, etc. separately to not muddy this up.
.
The RB's head actually starts downward a split second after Powell's. And why Powell's top of helmet is making contact with the front of the RB's helmet.
I remember two obvious offsides on them and 1 play where it looked like a neutral zone infraction. all first half
and I havent seen this mentioned here - but there were two short passing plays in the first half where their WR was blocking the RU defensive back before the throw was made. all uncalled.
and then there was the ridiculous uncalled open field hold where the RU defender was essentially dragged down (second half? which was seen by all those in attendance but not the ref 5 feet away) and the uncalled OPI in the end zone (which I'd like to see again but at the time it looked obvious - looked like the MSU WR two-armed push to our defender in the back/to the ground. btw the uncalled hold caused the MSU fans in front of us to turn and acknowledge "yeah this reffing is pretty bad". they saw it.
FWIW - at the time I didnt think the face mask was worthy of call. looked like a passing graze to me (havent seen replay). granted that gets called on RU but at the time I didnt think much of it. same with the hit on Dremel (only after did I get pissed when they called targeting on us for a far less dangerous hit)
There was a pI on Rodgers where the only part of the WR body he touched was the palms of the WR’s hands as the WR was pushing off him.
Thank you. Your post is very helpful. I've never played, but it must be hard for a player to learn to both keep his head up and lead with his shoulder. My guess is there's a temptation to make the head and shoulders one line rather than to bend the neck. But maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. Thanks again!
You really think a strong, linear force directly down the cervical and thoracic spine doesnt increase the risk for fracture and spinal cord damage??? Then counter that a less damaging concussion might occur if using the proper tackling form?? Holy F*&#!!!!
