If a guy much bigger than you lowers his head when your coming at him, your not lowering yours ?
2019-20 NCAA Football Thread
- Thread starter Derwin0
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 903
- Views 79K
I'm not going into a tackle with my helmet lowered. I was always taught to keep my head up and tackle with the shoulder while wrapping my arms around the ball carrier.
Face it, he broke the targeting rule and got called on it.
I’ve seen it this season. They will review before the snap nearly all hits like that. Then if they think it deserves another look they game will stop while they do so. It absolutely does not have to be called on the field to be called in the booth.
No, I want to move the rules back to where your allowed to hit a QB, take the skirts off and put pads back on them.
They are worse than a strike call in baseball.
They have taken ALL the rules and directed them to help the Offense.
Fwiw, Lawrence is a Prima donna and will milk it as long as he can.
If thats gonna be the rule, then why bother having officials on the field, someone in NY or where ever is gonna hold the game in thier hands anyways.The rule has been in effect since 2016.
New NCAA rule allows replay to call targeting
The NCAA will soon vote on several new rule proposals for the 2016 college football season.www.sbnation.com
Too bad its not called against the offense the same way though because seeing it was Lawrence that crouched and lowered his helmet first, it should have been called both ways.
There is SUPPOSE to be INTENT in the rule.The NCAA rules make no difference between intentional or not.
The film clearly showed him lowering his head in order to hit first with the helmet. That action is what got him for targeting, as the rule defines targeting as not just helmet-to-helmet contact, as shown below, the forth bullet point example is "Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of his helmet." The refs never said helmet-to-helmet, only targeting.
Hopefully they revamp the rule entirely, it needs it.
If thats gonna be the rule, then why bother having officials on the field, someone in NY or where ever is gonna hold the game in thier hands anyways.
There isn't though, intent was specifically removed years ago, in order to stop players from saying they didn't mean it.
Due to concerns about injuries, intent will never be put back into the targeting rule.
[automerge]1577659118[/automerge]
Here's a tip, don't want to get punished for breaking the rules, don't break them. It's that simple.
Nope, so far Bama usually gets the calls and Clemson does as well for the last several years ...That’s some pretty rose colored glasses you’re using. Did you steal my Bama ones ?
It would be nice to get calls at the very least get called EVENLY ... particularly when its a Big game as these are.
If this is the best officials they have ....
btw, here's the actual rule text from the rule book:
You'll notice that the part about hitting with the crown of the helmet is seperate fromt eh part about hitting someone's head/neck.
Players can be automatically disqualified (following replay review) for violating two definable rules: Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3) and Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4).
Here is how the rules are defined by the NCAA:
Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)
You'll notice that the part about hitting with the crown of the helmet is seperate fromt eh part about hitting someone's head/neck.
Players can be automatically disqualified (following replay review) for violating two definable rules: Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3) and Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4).
Here is how the rules are defined by the NCAA:
Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)
- No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul.
- 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.
It BETTER be ....
You mean you can't tell when someone intends to hurt and when they don't on most plays ?
You can tell when a player holds up and when they don't .....
Like the stupid rule that when you tackle a qb your now not allowed to fall on them .... oh I'm sorry Ms. Qb, did I hurt you ?
If you don't like the rules, then stop watching.
Either way, stop complaining because you're guy violated the rules and got punished for it. You've pretty much admitted he broke the targeting rule, and now are just trying to justify it by saying the rule is wrong. The rule has been in place for years already.
Ok, take that away ...
We still should have won ...
Till they take back another play that went for a TD ... the catch no catch ...
That rule says catch the ball and make a football move .... player caught the ball and took at least 2 steps before fumbling ....
TD the other way .... on wait, that was a Great play on the D side, we got to change that.
Face it, Clemson is VERY LUCKY to be there.
Wow, you obviously have not watched much Bama football. Lol.
We get calls that go against us all the time, many even questionable (unlike the targeting call) that change the momentum of the game.
It’s football. It happens.
In a game the refs, make that the Replay people, (no word if they are officials or not) tilted thier way, yes.
They managed to take points away from us, they did that quite well.
[automerge]1577662472[/automerge]
Heres hoping Burrow and LSU score another 49 points in the 1st half.
Every team plays with the calls made for and against them. It’s football.
Clemson made the most of what they had to work with in this game, OSU didn’t. It’s a tough pill to swallow in a otherwise very good season.
And now the poaching continues ...
After officially losing our Defensive coach Mike Hafley to HC at Boston College, we now lose your Offensive Co ordinator to Texas and Tom Herman.
They say, if you hire top notch Coaches, they will move on ... but it would be nice to get some continuity, more than 1 year out of these guys.
After officially losing our Defensive coach Mike Hafley to HC at Boston College, we now lose your Offensive Co ordinator to Texas and Tom Herman.
They say, if you hire top notch Coaches, they will move on ... but it would be nice to get some continuity, more than 1 year out of these guys.
Similar threads
