|
Post by kersting13 on Dec 2, 2021 10:11:21 GMT -8
If the idea is to improve the safety of the players, then they clearly failed, plain and simple. That play was safe for neither the receiver nor the defender, and it was clearly instigated by the defender. Whether the receiver was defenseless or not, the hit was an unsafe one, and everybody knew that—even that eye patch guy. Not penalizing the play is a disservice and suggests that they really don’t care about player safety. Either they need a broader definition of what targeting is or they need to adjust things so that there are different degrees of the penalty….something akin to murder charges, perhaps. That's what I don't understand most about the call. If they want to say that wasn't targeting because Harrison braced and took most of the contact with his shoulder, sure I guess I can understand that. But, the tackle itself was the type of tackle that I thought they were specifically trying to remove from football. To not have it be some type of penalty is hard to believe. That would be fine if the video showed that - but it clearly showed the crown of 23s helmet planted in the ear hole of the receiver. To your point though, tacklers launching into players with the crown of their helmets IS the type of play they're trying to remove from the game. I liken the emphasis on targeting to the emphasis on actually tagging the bag in MLB in order to record the out at 2B on a double play. The refs in both sports became too lax in allowing illegal plays - baseball allowed runners to slide into fielders illegally, which required fielders to avoid them and be granted "phantom" tags. When I was playing football in the HS in the mid 80s, kids would get called for "spearing" if they led with the crown of their helmet during a tackle. Was it an NCAA/NFL rule? I can't say with 100% confidence. But it feels the same to me - it's something that should have always been enforced, but was allowed for so long that it just became standard practice. Edit: a quick google search says "spearing" became an NFL down to HS rule in 1976.
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Dec 2, 2021 10:16:07 GMT -8
That's what I don't understand most about the call. If they want to say that wasn't targeting because Harrison braced and took most of the contact with his shoulder, sure I guess I can understand that. But, the tackle itself was the type of tackle that I thought they were specifically trying to remove from football. To not have it be some type of penalty is hard to believe. That would be fine if the video showed that - but it clearly showed the crown of 23s helmet planted in the ear hole of the receiver. To your point though, tacklers launching into players with the crown of their helmets IS the type of play they're trying to remove from the game. I liken the emphasis on targeting to the emphasis on actually tagging the bag in MLB in order to record the out at 2B on a double play. The refs in both sports became too lax in allowing illegal plays - baseball allowed runners to slide into fielders illegally, which required fielders to avoid them and be granted "phantom" tags. When I was playing football in the HS in the mid 80s, kids would get called for "spearing" if they led with the crown of their helmet during a tackle. Was it an NCAA/NFL rule? I can't say with 100% confidence. But it feels the same to me - it's something that should have always been enforced, but was allowed for so long that it just became standard practice. I'm not sure why certain posters focus on the "shoulder" aspect. I believe the body part has no bearing on a targeting call. It does not have to be helmet to helmet/head region. Leading with the crown to ANY area of the body is targeting/PF/"spearing". It use to be quite common with dirty players "crowning" defenseless players in the back or leg areas while going or already down. The reversal was blatantly wrong and I really expected the Pac12 to announce it as such. Too little too late, but not even that happened! But, wait... it'll probably come after Oregon plays tomorrow night as to not cause anyone to miss part of the game.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 2, 2021 10:22:48 GMT -8
I'm not so sure I saw a player bracing for impact, looked to me like it could easily be a case of a receiver suddenly stopping/changing speed and beginning to reach for a ball that was 8-12 inches behind him. He wasn't going to catch that ball due to timing, but it was a catchable ball and it was definitely top of helmet to the head, not the shoulder in either case, the defender launched in an inappropriate manner, targeting should have been upheld.
|
|
|
Post by OriginalWhizzinator on Dec 2, 2021 17:41:57 GMT -8
I don’t know, but he was a Duck, so that alone makes him a huge asshole. HTH. 👍🏻
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Dec 2, 2021 18:06:00 GMT -8
I don’t know, but he was a Duck, so that alone makes him a huge asshole. HTH. 👍🏻 Keep liking your own posts.
|
|
|
Post by OriginalWhizzinator on Dec 2, 2021 19:19:28 GMT -8
I don’t know, but he was a Duck, so that alone makes him a huge asshole. HTH. 👍🏻 Keep liking your own posts. Don’t worry, I will. (P.S. My father never liked you. 😉)
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Dec 2, 2021 21:48:30 GMT -8
Who acutally does the reviews? I should know, but I don't. There used to be an extra official in the booth that made the review but I don't think they do it that way now. Anyone?
|
|