Targeting Rules Need To Change

[SLOHusker]

One of the reasons defenses give up more points in my opinion are the targeting rules. Initially I thought targeting was meant solely to combat head injuries and only resulted from direct and blatant helmet-to-helmet contact of a defenseless player. Now though it is everything. Shoulder to helmet of a player lunging forward? Targeting. Helmet to abdomen? Targeting. In my opinion offensive players are learning to lead with a lowered head knowing the defender will have to make an awkward hands-only tackle or be penalized and ejected.
Once an offensive player lowers their head targeting should be automatically out. An incidental contact should not be penalized. At the very least stop ejecting players until the second targeting penalty of a game. These ejections are game-changing.

 

[The_Man_Behind_The_Man]

One of the reasons defenses give up more points in my opinion are the targeting rules. Initially I thought targeting was meant solely to combat head injuries and only resulted from direct and blatant helmet-to-helmet contact of a defenseless player. Now though it is everything. Shoulder to helmet of a player lunging forward? Targeting. Helmet to abdomen? Targeting. In my opinion offensive players are learning to lead with a lowered head knowing the defender will have to make an awkward hands-only tackle or be penalized and ejected.
Once an offensive player lowers their head targeting should be automatically out. An incidental contact should not be penalized. At the very least stop ejecting players until the second targeting penalty of a game. These ejections are game-changing.

Many cases shits to head are legit targeting cases. In the case of Clemson’s player hit on Fields I do agree on the targeting call or the ejection. It was a brutal hit on field’s for sure. But it was a hit that LBs are taught to make to the body and Fields was going upfield trying to get yardage similar to what a RB would be doing. This isn’t touch football. They need to revisit the targeting rule because the wussification of football needs to stop. Football is a brutal sport.

 

[Dierking1]

That would have been spearing if targeting was around either way player would be ejected that was a good call. Leading with your head should never be tolerated. I was taught when I played tuck your tail sky your eyes stick your shoulder into them and put them down. I agree targeting is getting crazy but that was a good call .

 

[huskerfan66]

IF that was a rb, more than likely no targeting called

 

[lazysunday]

Agreed, thought it was to curb head to head collisions

 

[scarletred]

Need to get rid of being ejected for the first offense during a game plus not be suspended for the first half in the next game..

And if a flag isn’t thrown for a penalty in the first place for targeting it can’t be reviewed .....

 

[HBFR]

Agreed, thought it was to curb head to head collisions

It was the appropriate call. Notice the announcers and refs were quick to call it. Clemson didn’t argue, neither did the player who committed the penalty.

 

[HBFR]

Need to get rid of being ejected for the first offense during a game plus not be suspended for the first half in the next game..

And if a flag isn’t thrown for a penalty in the first place for targeting it can’t be reviewed .....

Should they get rid of all replays or just the ones meant to improve player safety?

 

[scarletred]

Should they get rid of all replays or just the ones meant to improve player safety?

I’m all for players safety but too many targeting calls are to judgmental and don‘t warrant being ejected from the game or be suspended for the 1st of the next game..That’s the stupidest rule to be suspended for the whole first half of the next game ..

 

[dinglefritz]

IF that was a rb, more than likely no targeting called

He tried to move his head to the side if you watch the one angle of the video. I was surprised by the call. I guess I didn't realize a shot to the ribs of a runner could be targeting.

 

[Baxter48]

it’s a rule that is left to the interpretation of the game and replay officials. Just like holding or pass interference they need a standard definition and no gray areas for the officials to interpret in there own way. imo opinion basketball is even worse with watered down rules.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

I’m good with reviewing a call to see if it needs to be overturned, but reviewing plays to try to find penalties sucks.

 

[timnsun]

Many cases shits to head are legit targeting cases. In the case of Clemson’s player hit on Fields I do agree on the targeting call or the ejection. It was a brutal hit on field’s for sure. But it was a hit that LBs are taught to make to the body and Fields was going upfield trying to get yardage similar to what a RB would be doing. This isn’t touch football. They need to revisit the targeting rule because the wussification of football needs to stop. Football is a brutal sport.

I think a shit to the head is targeting every time. If I played football and someone took a shit to my head, I want them removed immediately. End of story.

 

[dacred]

That would have been spearing if targeting was around either way player would be ejected that was a good call. Leading with your head should never be tolerated. I was taught when I played tuck your tail sky your eyes stick your shoulder into them and put them down. I agree targeting is getting crazy but that was a good call .

It was a good call....but why was he still on the sidelines after he was ejected? He was ejected and later shown on TV still on the sidelines encouraging his teammates?

 

[JaySker402]

 

[Blindcheck]

I think the call was a good call last night, but I also agree the penalty is a bit harsh.

in high school, the Targeting penalty while officiated very similarly, doesn't call for an automatic ejection....it is a judgement call by the officials if the hit was over the top.

I do think targeting as called now is hopefully teaching coaches to teach the game differently>

I thought that the call last night whiel called Targeting (which was probably correct based on the current rules) would have been a spearing call...which was rarely called in the past, but should have been called more often...The spearing call protects both the tackler and runner.

 

[hoquat63]

It was a good call....but why was he still on the sidelines after he was ejected? He was ejected and later shown on TV still on the sidelines encouraging his teammates?

Rule has changed. Ejected players no longer have to leave field.

 

[rrthusker]

I still don’t agree a player should be ejected. Administer the personal foul penalty and move on.

 

[SLOHusker]

If you watch the replay above Fields is partly at fault for the severity of the hit. Skalsi was lunging for the impact and tackle when Fields basically turned his body away so the collision is with his side and lower back. If Fields lowered his body in a normal manner it would have been a normal tackle, or closer to it. Remember the targeting penalty against NU against OSU? The OSU receiver positioned his body to make a non-targeting hit almost impossible.
People are correct in calling the Skalsi hit spearing more than targeting. This is actually more dangerous for the tackler who risks a spinal cord injury. Not a good technique, but again, Fields turned his body and took a hit in a vulnerable spot.
I want to have legit targeting calls result in a penalty and ejection with two in one game. But things are just overboard right now.

 

[cidsports]

Keep your head up.

Spearing isn't legal in football. Text book targeting call against Clemson LB, who seems to have a pattern of it.

 

[Dierking1]

It was a good call....but why was he still on the sidelines after he was ejected? He was ejected and later shown on TV still on the sidelines encouraging his teammates?

You can stay on sidelines

 

[otismotis08]

I still don’t agree a player should be ejected. Administer the personal foul penalty and move on.

Just this.

 

[HuskerO]

He tried to move his head to the side if you watch the one angle of the video. I was surprised by the call. I guess I didn't realize a shot to the ribs of a runner could be targeting.

Especially when the runner tried spinning or "eluded" back into the tackler.

 

[Swiv3D]

It was a good call....but why was he still on the sidelines after he was ejected? He was ejected and later shown on TV still on the sidelines encouraging his teammates?

Because they don't have to leave the sidelines anymore from targeting... because the rule makers are starting to realize the ejection part of the penalty is doing more harm than good and slowly but surely walking it back

 

[Swiv3D]

View embedded media

Yup I had no problem with a penalty for this very reason to remind the defensive player that he could seriously f*** himself up. The ejection part is what is terrible about this rule. It was a bad form tackle, not a dirty one. He was doing almost everything else right except for his head, he wasn't trying to hurt Fields

 

[Trojanhorse13]

I don't think a player should be ejected from the game for targeting.

 

[skintight]

I totally disagree that this would have been considered "spearing" years ago. typically "spearing" was when a ball carrier was essentially being held up or essentially had stopped his forward motion and then some jackass would launch himself head first with an obvious attempt to injury the ball carrier or a guy standing by.

 

[Baxter48]

Wasn’t the hit by jack tatum on Daryl stingly a targeting in today’s world?

 

[oldjar07]

I totally disagree that this would have been considered "spearing" years ago. typically "spearing" was when a ball carrier was essentially being held up or essentially had stopped his forward motion and then some jackass would launch himself head first with an obvious attempt to injury the ball carrier or a guy standing by.

Agreed, this wouldn't have even been spearing 2 decades ago, just a good clean hit. With the expansive definition of targeting, I knew it could be called even when Skalski was nowhere near the other guy's helmet. I have no problem with calling it spearing or even targeting now, but kicking out key players can change the whole dynamic of the game. Skalski is Clemson's best defensive player and although I don't think they'd win, I think the game would have been a lot closer if Skalski was able to play the 2nd half. Clemson also had a starting safety sitting the first half for a questionable targeting call in the previous game. This could have been one of the best, most competitive games of all time, but with the ejection rule for targeting kicking out 2 key defensive players for Clemson, the game turns into a blowout. It's just bullshit cutting perfectly healthy players' careers short by the poorly thought out ejection rule, and it's the dumbest rule in all of sports.

 

[Mr.Scary13]

That rule was put in to manipulate the game. Its not about safety. There are 100 "targeting " hits every game that dont get called. Its complete BS.

 

[HuskerOH]

If his head was up looking at Fields kidneys it would not have been called (I am sure there will be blood in his urine for a couple of days). However, when you are looking at the ground and not at your target, you are leading with your helmet. If he was looking at his target, he would hot have been able to get that low...

I noticed that the DB's for NU are leading with their helmets a lot more this year. If they don't clean it up, there will be many ejections next year. Spielman said it best about tackling; Lower your butt, lead with you feet and come with bad intentions.

 

[oldjar07]

If his head was up looking at Fields kidneys it would not have been called (I am sure there will be blood in his urine for a couple of days). However, when you are looking at the ground and not at your target, you are leading with your helmet. If he was looking at his target, he would hot have been able to get that low...

I noticed that the DB's for NU are leading with their helmets a lot more this year. If they don't clean it up, there will be many ejections next year. Spielman said it best about tackling; Lower your butt, lead with you feet and come with bad intentions.

If his head was up, he probably hits Fields in the helmet and gets ejected for targeting either way. The guy was just trying to make a play and prevent Ohio St from converting a 3rd down. You shouldn't get ejected for trying to make a football play, especially when it isn't even called on the field but had to be reviewed by the booth.

 

[John_J_Rambo]

they should just do away with the ejection aspect. keep the 15-yard penalty if confirmed in review.

problem solved.

 

[HuskerOH]

If his head was up, he probably hits Fields in the helmet and gets ejected for targeting either way. The guy was just trying to make a play and prevent Ohio St from converting a 3rd down. You shouldn't get ejected for trying to make a football play, especially when it isn't even called on the field but had to be reviewed by the booth.

It was how the helmet was facing... Keep your head up and the calls go away. How many people want to put their nose first in the tackle? Corey Schlesinger kept braking his face masks with the way he would run and block, we need him to teach the kids how to do it.

 

[cubsker]

rule change needed. targeting, 15 yard penalty. launching, when you leave your feet head first and hit somebody. 15 yards and ejection.

 

[nick614]

Clemson deserved it and much more

 

[oldjar07]

It was how the helmet was facing... Keep your head up and the calls go away. How many people want to put their nose first in the tackle? Corey Schlesinger kept braking his face masks with the way he would run and block, we need him to teach the kids how to do it.

Except that's complete BS because guys with their head up are called for targeting all the time.

 

[oldjar07]

rule change needed. targeting, 15 yard penalty. launching, when you leave your feet head first and hit somebody. 15 yards and ejection.

I don't even think launching should get you ejected the first time. Refs will call launching instead of targeting and we end up in the same place we are now.

 

[oldjar07]

View embedded media

Clemson deserved it and much more

That was also a bad call. The booth just needs to stay the **** out of calling penalties on the field.

 

[nick614]

That was also a bad call. The booth just needs to stay the **** out of calling penalties on the field.

I think there should be 3 replay officials, each is independent and doesn't know what the others vote. Need a unanimous 3-0 to overturn or call the penalty. Each review is given 90 seconds to make a decision. Default decision is call on the field.

There also needs to be better camera angles that should be the same regardless of broadcaster.

Need a raised camera angle down both side lines and goal lines and there should be a large 3-5 yard buffer zone where coaches and players can't enter.

Probably need to add 2 more on field refs as well so the linesmen never leave the LOS.