Targeting
Hopefully this topic has not been covered recently and if so my apologies.
I was somewhat aware of the changes to the rules made in 2013 involving players tackling using the top of the helmet against defenseless players. But I did not know that players could be ejected on the spot and were required to sit out a half game. As this has occurred to Michigan players the past 2 weeks it was interesting to actually read the rule. This link from the American Football Coaches Association outlines that rule. Of course the debate arises from the subjective interpretation/application of that rule.
http://www.afca.com/article/article.php?id=2342
Anyway, the sun is out, Michigan football is relevant again and its a great day to be a Wolverine fan! Go Blue!
October 18th, 2015 at 11:28 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 5:14 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 18th, 2015 at 4:27 PM ^
Two different MSU fans that I know told me it was "clear as day", and "obvious" targeting. I just don't even have words today. Really, even this comment is hard for me.
October 18th, 2015 at 6:32 PM ^
That's the kind of "homerism" that makes me want to punch people in the face. If you can't call it for what it is....nevermind. MSU fans. Say no more.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:30 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:35 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:57 AM ^
game were Pac12 refs, they are also a comically bad crew of officials.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:35 AM ^
I don't think the targeting changed the game too much. Gedeon was fine. But the 15 yard BS penalty did not help. They ended up scoring a TD there. He was friggin thrown into the player.
Will be curious to see how the UFR shows Ross's use. I don't think he played a whole lot in the second half, which is strange given Bolden's absence?
Overall the ref's were bad on both sides. Our punter just dropped the ball.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^
Can refs be fired/fined over something like this? This was a complete botched call. What kinds of repercussions do refs have for games like this? So disappointing when refs help to aid in the outcome of a game.
October 18th, 2015 at 2:21 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:36 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
Frankly, the rule is flawed. Telling the kids that they need to not lead by the crown of their helmet only when a player is defenseless is useless. How are they supposed to do it. They can completely abolish it or define the rules better. Otherwise, defensive players will try and hope they don't injure themselves.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:58 AM ^
and they still got it wrong
October 18th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
The clowns on the field got it wrong, but, hey, you've got to give them some slack. It's a bang-bang play, and they're not always in perfect position. It's possible they didn't see Bolden being thrown into Cook.
But the clown in the booth has no such excuse. He's the one who should be fired, immediately. And publically.
October 18th, 2015 at 1:01 PM ^
is the only official who isn't named in the boxscore. I'd like to see some more accountability for the replay official, and anonymity is not the answer. I don't want people tracking them down and making their life hell either, but this replay official should never be allowed to work another game.
October 18th, 2015 at 3:21 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
Honestly, this exposes the rule.
They need to implement a rule similar to flagerent in Basketball. Targeting 1 - is 15 yards, and counts as a unsportsman like conduct (2 and youre gone). Targeting 2 is 15 yards, and youre gone.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^
should be like facemask penalties; incidental vs purposeful.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:11 PM ^
I would've been pissed if this play was called as a Targeting 1. This was just a flat-out bad call.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 12:42 PM ^
True, but it is still a 15 yard gift.
October 18th, 2015 at 1:27 PM ^
This is too harsh a penalty to be based on a subjective call.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:44 AM ^
That should tell you all that you need to know about the call.
God, I hope OSU whips some Spartan ass.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:21 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 12:34 PM ^
So I can't say what the guys in the booth said.
Tell Urbz to not let up. Grind the Spartans into the dirt.
October 18th, 2015 at 2:27 PM ^
Spielman was initially totally for the call and the ejection, while the other guy was ambivalent. Once he saw the replay and realized that Bolden was thrown into the pile, Spielman kind of reversed course, and both agreed that it was a suspect penalty. They wouldn't go so far as to say there shouldn't have been a penalty, but they said it was iffy.
The guys in studio at halftime went a step farther, calling it the worst penalty call of the season. One guy even questioned whether the NCAA should look at amending the rule in season (not going to happen).
October 18th, 2015 at 11:44 AM ^
I will never admit this in public or especially to any michigan state fans because the worst people whine about officiating when arguing. But WOOF was the officiating excruciatingly bad yesterday. I don't know how it looked on TV with replays and all that, but in the stadium I thought there were multiple bad bad calls. Now I don't want to say thats the reason we lost, but man is it tough in hindsight after the surprise ending.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 18th, 2015 at 11:55 AM ^
call that as they should and we win
October 18th, 2015 at 4:29 PM ^
It was without a doubt, the worst I have seen. I'm still furious.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:55 AM ^
on TV. It seemed that many sparty drives were sustained through penalties. The penalties were 5 to 8 with M getting the 8 but it seemed the MSU calls werent critical. Besides the targeting call the Peppers interception that was negated by penalty was huge.
October 18th, 2015 at 2:30 PM ^
You mean when the Sparty receiver fell down because he ran into the official, and Lewis fell on top of him because he was so close, and they called holding on Lewis? Yeah, that was pretty terrible.
All in all, I think it was a poorly officiated game from both sides. Michigan had a couple of killer penalties that were legit, though, like Henry jumping on the pile that kept the drive alive.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:45 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 18th, 2015 at 12:01 PM ^
The intent of the rule is good and is needed. If we want to be watching football many years down the road, some changes need to be made to keep it safe. The head has to be off limits. The penalty is severe so players adhere to the rule. The issue here is definitely the booth review. I am sure changes will be made because of the crap decision yesterday.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:06 PM ^
I probably don't understand the rule. If the intent is good, then why would you ever allow leading with the crown of the helmet. Ever. Wouldn't that hurt the defensive player? It sounds like the rule is only to protect the defenless players.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:14 PM ^
You are correct about it only protecting the defenseless player. If they really want to make the game safe, they would ban the leading with the crown of the helmet.
October 18th, 2015 at 12:31 PM ^
1) Officials are currently instructed that when in doubt, it's targeting. This I would definitely change.
2) When the call goes to replay it's subject to the usual rule that the call on the field stands unless it can be definitively overturned. Maybe in the case of a targeting ejection the burden of proof should be the other way around? It's pretty rare to not have a good replay review of the hit. (But maybe not rare enough, in which case I'll stick with #1.)
October 18th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
A lot of people in this thread seem to be advocating for a two-tiered standard, or some flexibility in applying the ejection. As I understand it, this is exactly the system we have. That is, the ejection piece is automatically reviewed by the booth official. The real problem I have is the poor decisions be made by the booth official in applyling the flexibility to confirm or overturn a call of "targeting". The hit on Rudock last week involved a defense player clearly and intentionally lowering his head to hit a clearly sliding (feet first) Rudock. This play was ruled "not" targetting. Last afternoon, Bolden was thrown into Cook (who was sliding) and landed head first on him. That was somehow ruled targetting. I don't think the rule is all that bad. What I think has been terrible, particularly in the last two Michigan games, is the application of the rule by the booth officials. Did Bolden intentionally strike a defenseless player's head with his head? No. As for affecting the outcome... to be a truly good team you have to play at a level that even when these kinds of things go against you, you still end up with more points than your opponent. We're getting there.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:59 AM ^
Needs to change when making a judgement call that does have an impact on the game.
Is this in the hands of a single person? The review should involve more than a single opinion! Maybe that is something they should look at. How do we know if the person making the final judgement call is being impartial at that exact moment?
October 18th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 18th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
I think the targeting rule needs to be changed. In cases of accidental or non-malicous hits to the head, the refs' only options are no call or ejection. There probably needs to be a less severe non-ejection penalty. Would be subjective, but the situation now is untenable.
October 18th, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^
See, I dont' think that's true. The rule allows for an unnecessary roughness call "with targetting", the booth reviews the "with targetting" part, and even if it is determined not to be targetting, isn't the unnecessary roughness penalty still applied? In which case there is an option between "no call" and "ejection".
October 18th, 2015 at 12:29 PM ^
October 18th, 2015 at 12:39 PM ^
The personal foul is not reviewable, only the ejection.
Replay's supposed to be for errors of fact, not official's judgment. The penalty is considered a judgment call and those are in general not subject to replay review. An exception is made for the ejection portion of the call because the penalty's so extreme.
October 18th, 2015 at 1:07 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 18th, 2015 at 1:24 PM ^
The yardage plus the targeting ejection got overturned in the Northwestern game. The two calls were almost identical -- in the NW game, the ref called "personal foul, targeting," while in the MSU game, the ref called "personal foul plus targeting." I don't know whether they also could have erased the 15-yard penalty in the MSU game -- assuming, of course, the replay official didn't have his head up his ass -- but they can do it in some circumstances, as evidenced by what happened in the NW game.
October 18th, 2015 at 2:14 PM ^
is that the people the Big Ten puts in the replay booth are certified idiots. If the Big Ten could ever find replay officials that weren't morons, the rule would probably work.
But I guess you have to write the rule to account for the incomptence of the people implementing the rule.
BTW, here is the moron who was in the booth yesterday:
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/print-edition/2012/11/30/top-corpo…