Way to go SEC Officials of Failure...
- Thread starter Gaimcock
- Start date
Yep....and there's many tater-haters that thought the roughing the kicker should have been a 15 yd personal foul on the tater punter for kicking the OSU defender in the face
Actually, I think the TV consultant reversed himself on the targeting. He originally called it one way saying the tackler lowered head, but after the decision was made he agreed with it. I need to back and look at it.
Gotta watch his left hand on a good, non-blurry replay. I think I understand what they saw now.
Um, you do know Herbie is an OSU alum and former QB? Was probably hard for him to be impartial either way calling the game.
Lol; lot of attempts at spinning and justifying.
My opinion: football is a physical, violent game. If you have to look at a slow motion replay, really ANY replay, to identify whether a hit was "targeting", it is NOT. Its like porn; you know it when you see it. Ex: the Oklahoma hit on the LSU receiver; THAT was targeting. The hit on Lawrence was FOOTBALL, not "porn." Its like telling a boxer he can't knock a guy out.
There's a lot of rhetoric about how players are taught to tackle, ie shoulder not head. I was coached "hat on the numbers." Whatever. Tackling in practice or on a tackling dummy is not the same as in a game; in a game it becomes the "football play" everyone talks about. Its instinct. You do not go in during the split second before contact saying to yourself "I'm going to hit this guy with the crown of my helmet," or "I'm going to hit this guy with my shoulder." Its instinct; nature; the shoulder is not your center of gravity. Furthermore, watch ANYONE on a football field before contact, whether giver or taker; that head goes DOWN.
And again, the fumble/scoop...please.
My opinion: football is a physical, violent game. If you have to look at a slow motion replay, really ANY replay, to identify whether a hit was "targeting", it is NOT. Its like porn; you know it when you see it. Ex: the Oklahoma hit on the LSU receiver; THAT was targeting. The hit on Lawrence was FOOTBALL, not "porn." Its like telling a boxer he can't knock a guy out.
There's a lot of rhetoric about how players are taught to tackle, ie shoulder not head. I was coached "hat on the numbers." Whatever. Tackling in practice or on a tackling dummy is not the same as in a game; in a game it becomes the "football play" everyone talks about. Its instinct. You do not go in during the split second before contact saying to yourself "I'm going to hit this guy with the crown of my helmet," or "I'm going to hit this guy with my shoulder." Its instinct; nature; the shoulder is not your center of gravity. Furthermore, watch ANYONE on a football field before contact, whether giver or taker; that head goes DOWN.
And again, the fumble/scoop...please.
And that is exactly why the rule is in place, to change the instinct to put the head down as they go into contact. The defender has to see what they hit...it does not matter what the runner does, the defender CANNOT lead with the crown of the helmet and make contact with the hear /shoulders with the crown. I dont think there was any ill intent with the hot, but it was textbook targeting by rule. Same play and he has his head up, no penalty.
And I agree with the scoop and score, I initially thought it was incomplete but after the replays, I thought thought it was a catch and fumble. But OSU didnt lose the game because of the that play. They lost because
1st & goal from the 5 - FG
1st & goal from the 8 - FG
1st & goal from the 10 - FG
1st down from the 23 - INT
Clemson defense won that game.
Also roughing the kicker extended a drive but it was still 99 yd drive.
Targeting extend another TD drive
Duh.
Like I said, actually WATCH the players out there. You ever hit anyone, or get hit head on? Instinct is not going to change. All of the wildebeests run by the lion, but one will get caught; THATS the gist of how targeting is called.
Nice pull from facebook in the rest of your post btw.
Since it was ruled a fumble on the field it should not have been overturned. Had they ruled it incomplete on the field I could agree with the call. As far as the targeting call, I really think that rule needs to be revisited. The defensive player dropped his head but did not appear to be attacking with it. To me it just looked like he was trying to go in low. Lawrence ducked his body which created the helmet to helmet contact. Originally I thought they called Young for a late hit as did the commentators.
You can also add the dropped screen on one of those FG drives that probably would have gone for a TD. Penalties and miscues by OSU did more to lose the game than what Clemson actually did to win it.
I disagree, you most certainly can change “instinct.” Ask any defense coach and they will tell you they they teach to keep the head up. But when plays happen so fast, it doesn't always happen.
BYW, i watched the game, didnt need FB to figure that out.
Read the rules. Helmet to helmet is not what made it targeting. The defensive player leading with the crown of the helmet is what makes it targeting. Does not matter if he hit him in the helmet or chest it’s still targeting when you lead with the crown.
Similar threads
