Author Topic: KCI and Targeting Situation  (Read 5416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-268
  • When you quit learning you quit living
KCI and Targeting Situation
« on: December 28, 2010, 06:53:23 AM »
If the returner had muffed the ball, would there have been KCI?  Is there a missed targeting foul at the end of the play?

[yt=425,350]GKN6pGFQ5Gg[/yt]

Offline mccormicw

  • *
  • Posts: 295
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-4
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2010, 07:17:47 AM »
As long as the receiver has the option of calling a fair catch, I believe the only limitation on the defender should be no contact prior to the receiver touching the ball.  I understand the rules dont support my position but it does mean that my interpretation of interfering is very leniant.  Speaking of fair catch, what was the arm waive by the receiver?  Seems like an invalid fair catch signal as a minimum.  I think I take a pass on the targeting unless we are calling every single time the helmets touch.

Offline Welpe

  • *
  • Posts: 1860
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-11
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2010, 09:25:46 AM »
I have an invalid fair catch signal and it certainly looks like KCI as well.  I could see a flag for targeting at the end but not sure if I would call that or not.

Offline Osric Pureheart

  • *
  • Posts: 592
  • FAN REACTION: +18/-7
  • 1373937 or 308?
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2010, 10:27:57 AM »
It's certainly poor technique from the tackler.  I wouldn't be disappointed if a 5-man crew didn't see it, it's a call for the deep wing to make (or pass on).

Offline TxJim

  • *
  • Posts: 449
  • FAN REACTION: +18/-22
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2010, 10:37:45 AM »
Good discussion item Mike.  The hitter places himself at risk too. At the HS level, shouldn't we always caution kids we see ducking their heads this way to "see what you hit"?  I do whenever I see it and I tell their coaches what I saw too. Not sure if this example could be caught as a foul at full speed or not.  The intent of the rule is to protect both players involved, not just the one hit.  I suppose the axiom should be to err on the side of safety on a helmet led hit.
Sportsmanship is contagious - Let's have an epidemic!

Mark uk

  • Guest
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2010, 11:53:17 AM »
To me KCI and it should be targeting because he clearly lowers his head, but since I needed slo-mo to see it I'm not sure I'd have called it in real time. I wouldn't call any hand movement below the shoulders a signal otherwise you can be penalising a guy who's arms are pumping as he runs or flailing if he loses balance.

MJT

  • Guest
Re: KCI and Targeting Situation
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2010, 04:56:08 PM »
Our philosophy on KCI is if there is no contact before the catch, and he makes the catch clean (which he did in this play) we would not have KCI. If there is no contact before he muffs the ball we would have a flag down. If the contact is before the catch or muff, we will have a flag no matter what.

I would say we should have a foul at the end of the play.