Big Hit

[NVFOA_Ump]

Was R last night and had this one.  Team A runs lots of QB sweep options with a trailing running back. Team B defensive ends are unblocked the way A runs this play are getting really frustrated as QB's timing is pretty good and he keeps dumping the ball to the running back before they can get to him.  QB takes the snap and rolls right directly in front of me.  B defensive end (B89) has a clear path directly to the QB with no blocking in between.  QB tosses a backward pass to the trailing RB and B89 decides he's had enough and is going to light up the QB after the ball is clearly gone.  He takes 2 more steps lowers his shoulder, and connects with a shoulder just below the facemask of the QB and actually lifts the QB off the ground with the hit.  QB lands hard on his back hitting his head on the turf.  What, if anything, would you call?

[bama_stripes]

PF-UNR.  Possibly an ejection if you judge it to be an attempt to injure.

[dammitbobby]

^^ this.  And if you don't toss him for the first one, a warning that you will on the next one.

[lawdog]

Hard to evaluate without seeing a play, sounds like you are saying you judged this to be late after the runner clearly no longer has the ball.  That sounds like PF Unnecessary roughness.  No possible way to judge ejection without seeing it, but it doesn't sound like it checks any boxes.  Hit as you described is not high, just a bit late on a runner.

They are running an option play, drawing the defender in to hit you so you pitch to an open back is part of running said play.  Fed doesn't protect you because you are a "QB" when you are actually a running back. 

[CalhounLJ]

Was R last night and had this one.  Team A runs lots of QB sweep options with a trailing running back. Team B defensive ends are unblocked the way A runs this play are getting really frustrated as QB's timing is pretty good and he keeps dumping the ball to the running back before they can get to him.  QB takes the snap and rolls right directly in front of me.  B defensive end (B89) has a clear path directly to the QB with no blocking in between.  QB tosses a backward pass to the trailing RB and B89 decides he's had enough and is going to light up the QB after the ball is clearly gone.  He takes 2 more steps lowers his shoulder, and connects with a shoulder just below the facemask of the QB and actually lifts the QB off the ground with the hit.  QB lands hard on his back hitting his head on the turf.  What, if anything, would you call?

Based on the description you give, I have targeting. He took aim and contacted an opponent above the shoulders with his shoulder. Ejection.

[Ralph Damren]

.......And remember, roughing the passer only applies to forward passes.

[NVFOA_Ump]

.......And remember, roughing the passer only applies to forward passes.

I did flag for PF-UNR which was just in front of team B's bench and the HC went ballistic with the "that's football" and "let 'em play" bs. So Ralph is reading the minds of our crew after our postgame discussion.  I asked the crew what would be the correct call if the pass had been forward by a few yards instead of backward by a few yards?  There was some discussion around "out of the pocket" but we all finally agreed that the call would be PF-RTP and that the "out of the pocket" has no bearing on the play.  Would we give the defense more "leeway" here on a backward pass vs. a forward pass regarding calling a PF?

[lawdog]

Would we give the defense more "leeway" here on a backward pass vs. a forward pass regarding calling a PF?

Not for targeting, but otherwise as a general rule, absolutely yes, because a runner is not defenseless whereas a passer is.  I'm not clear on your description if it was targeting or not.  I read below the mask as more middle of the chest.  That's why its hard to say without video.

[refjeff]

I don't know how it's targeting if contact is below the face mask.  The face mask extends to at least the chin and I don't see how it's possible to get a shoulder pad below that and hit the QB in the neck.

DQ?  Would the same tackle be a DQ if the QB still had the ball?

It's a PF, don't make it something it is not.

[CalhounLJ]

I don't know how it's targeting if contact is below the face mask.  The face mask extends to at least the chin and I don't see how it's possible to get a shoulder pad below that and hit the QB in the neck.

DQ?  Would the same tackle be a DQ if the QB still had the ball?

It's a PF, don't make it something it is not.

The chin is still above the shoulders. Which is the target area for targeting. Take a look at the photo below. There's still much "target" exposed there.

[AlUpstateNY]

I don't know how it's targeting if contact is below the face mask.  The face mask extends to at least the chin and I don't see how it's possible to get a shoulder pad below that and hit the QB in the neck.

DQ?  Would the same tackle be a DQ if the QB still had the ball?

It's a PF, don't make it something it is not.

The definition of "Targeting" (NFHS 2-20-2 starts out with a very specific, "unique" description; "Targeting is an act by any player who takes aim and initiates contact:" which......" suggests both deliberation and intent.  Another foul, which suggests specific intent is "Flagrant" (2-16-c) both of which add a judgment, of what is observed in that unique instance, which separates from and goes beyond other fouls. 

Either foul allows for disqualification, when the excess application is obvious & clear.  when that certainty is questionable, as suggested above, PF seems the more appropriate solution.

[Fatso]

Based on the description you give, I have targeting. He took aim and contacted an opponent above the shoulders with his shoulder. Ejection.

I think we'd have to see the play to make an informed ruling. It could be targeting without ejection.

[AlUpstateNY]

I think we'd have to see the play to make an informed ruling. It could be targeting without ejection.

Thankfully, there's no rigid definition for the term, "cheap shot", but we're each responsible for recognizing, and deciding when we've seen one & then dealing with it. It's a unique decision about what we've seen, in that unique instance, and our conclusion can range from a stern warning to an immediate ejection (based on specifically what we've seen in THAT unique instance). 

Hopefully it's "very rare" but ignoring, or minimizing it, can create FAR greater problems.