RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => General Discussion => Topic started by: VALJ on October 09, 2013, 08:50:54 PM
-
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1803524-division-iii-football-player-gets-hit-so-hard-his-mouth-guard-flies-out?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national
In real time, I don't think there's any way we don't flag this. Looks like this is shoulder to shoulder from the slo-mo, though...
-
Shoulder to manubrium. And as Rom Gilbert is trying to make clear...the manubrium ain't the neck
-
That will draw my flag every time...
Shoulder to manubrium. And as Rom Gilbert is trying to make clear...the manubrium ain't the neck
Is the manubrium in the neck area?
I'm flagging that hit every damn time. If it ends my 'career', so be it.
-
I don't see this as a foul in NCAA. If NCAA wants to have this a foul, they need to give some kind of automated fair catch protection to receivers.
-
That looks like shoulder to the facemask to me ^flag
-
If our goal is to encourage tacklers to lower their target...... ^flag
-
I have the initial contact at the shoulder but then the shoulder exploding upward through the head. I like a flag here.
-
Like I said - in real time, I don't see any way we CAN'T flag it, and in NFHS, that's that. Those of you that do college - targeting. resulting in an EJ? And on an FBS game, does the EJ stand?
-
Need to be careful whenever you say the initial contact is NOT at the head or neck area because based on what I have seen and heard from Rogers Redding and the CFO (and now watching IR at work), that is going to almost eliminate any chance of a targeting call that gets upheld.
-
To me that's at the very least "neck Area"
-
NFHS - with only one chance on the field to see it- no foul.
I can't stop/slow a YouTube video down to see a drive up into the face mask.
Since I'm not a doctor and performed poorly in Anatomy & Physiology 25 years ago, I've no idea what the manubrium is.
-
Since I'm not a doctor and performed poorly in Anatomy & Physiology 25 years ago, I've no idea what the manubrium is.
http://bit.ly/16TmiKI :)
-
The defenders head is above the shoulders of the receiver. There is no way not to have a foul on this play. He is not trying to make a tackle. he is clearly trying to blow up the receiver in the neck area.
-
The defenders head is above the shoulders of the receiver.
Unless he ducks, I don't see how it could be any other positions. Looks like a shoulder to shoulder hit to me. He never launched, in fact his right foot never came off the ground. I guess if the NCAA says its a foul so be it.
-
Unless he ducks, I don't see how it could be any other positions. Looks like a shoulder to shoulder hit to me. He never launched, in fact his right foot never came off the ground. I guess if the NCAA says its a foul so be it.
You are watching the same video as me aren't you? He clearly launches upwards as he hits the receiver. It even shows it in the still photo above the video
-
We don't usually get slow motion looks at these type plays, but from the live action speed two things seem to stand out; (1) the offensive player does not seem to have firm control of the ball and is moving, in his efforts to gain control. (2) the defenders head, all the way through the contact, seems to be clearly to the left side of the ball carrier's head, suggesting that any contact between the defender and the ball carrier's head would have been incidental, althugh severe.
I didn't sense any indication of "Targeting" or "aiming" that would suggest a deliberate effort to foul. Based on what I saw at live speed, presuming I had the same angle as the camera, I would NOT have thrown a flag.
-
I didn't sense any indication of "Targeting" or "aiming" that would suggest a deliberate effort to foul. Based on what I saw at live speed, presuming I had the same angle as the camera, I would NOT have thrown a flag.
And that's is pretty much how I saw it too. I don't see any head contact, appears to be shoulder to shoulder. Did he hit hard? Undoubtedly. Could he have wrapped up and tackled him? Yes.
The angle and movement of both players have a lot to do with the perceived severity of the hit.
-
We don't usually get slow motion looks at these type plays, but from the live action speed two things seem to stand out; (1) the offensive player does not seem to have firm control of the ball and is moving, in his efforts to gain control. (2) the defenders head, all the way through the contact, seems to be clearly to the left side of the ball carrier's head, suggesting that any contact between the defender and the ball carrier's head would have been incidental, althugh severe.
I didn't sense any indication of "Targeting" or "aiming" that would suggest a deliberate effort to foul. Based on what I saw at live speed, presuming I had the same angle as the camera, I would NOT have thrown a flag.
Thankfully you were NOT the field judge on this play, then.
That's a clear cut targeting foul; properly called.
I can't fathom how anybody can possibly think that's not a foul. The defender attacks with an upward, forward thrust (that takes him off his feet) and targets the receivers helmet with his left shoulder.
This is a PERFECT EXAMPLE of the type of hit the NCAA is trying to get out of football.
Enjoy the rest of the day off, B9.
-
We can argue perception all day. A "one shot" look in HS ball doesn't appear to me there is a hit to the helmet. Since we are in the general discussion forum, we are approaching this from two different viewpoints.
I've run it back multiple times. Can't get a real good stop/start run with YouTube to see this chin shot everyone says is there.
-
His shoulderpad hits the bottom of the recievers facemask at first contact knocking it and his mouthpiece off and out
-
The chin shot is clear due to the immediate backward motion of A's head.
If the contact had been anywhere else, his head would have come forward prior to moving backward in a whiplash type motion. The angle and direction at which the helmet leaves the player's head is another strong indicator.
-
A couple of things I notice:
1. B9 is not wearing his mouthpiece.
2. A10 needs to strap on his helmet tighter if he wants it to be of any practical use.
The wing official might be able to see helmet to chin, but from this angle all I can see is forearms to the chest, um, manubrium on initial contact. I think the fact that the helmet flies off makes it look worse, but are we going to start penalizing defenders because players don't strap up? He did not lead with his helmet, and I don't see his forearms make contact above the neck.
It would have been worse if B9 had gone low. That would have been completely legal but likely more damaging to A10.
-
I'm not convinced we're all watching the same video.
B9 clearly rips his mouthpiece out with his right hand after making the hit.
-
I see a motion with his hand, so I suppose he does rip it out to say something to the other player. I thought it was hanging down from his facemask when he made the hit.
-
Thankfully you were NOT the field judge on this play, then.
That's a clear cut targeting foul; properly called.
I can't fathom how anybody can possibly think that's not a foul. The defender attacks with an upward, forward thrust (that takes him off his feet) and targets the receivers helmet with his left shoulder.
This is a PERFECT EXAMPLE of the type of hit the NCAA is trying to get out of football.
Enjoy the rest of the day off, B9.
Unlike you, Inside the Stripes, I'm still looking for my first perfect game, and I actually still leave an odor behind in the bathroom. I didn't see any "upward thrust" nor can I speak for whatever the NCAA is trying to get out of football. There are times I wish NCAA officials would show a lot more control over excessively arrogant players and trash talking on seemingly EVERY play, which maybe would give HS athletes less really bad examples to emulate, but I realize they have additional challenges that require their focus elsewhere, and maybe they just don't always enjoy the personal interactive command poor HS officials often have over younger players.
One would think someone who believes they are as obviously gifted, as you apparently do, would be better equipped to accept the harsh reality that much of our actual performance on the field involves perceptions that are NEVER exactly like the perceptions of our crewmates, and we learn to work within those often minute differences to get the job done effectively and as smoothly as possible. By the way, I am exremely grateful, I'm not your field judge as well.
-
NFHS: In both real time and slow motion replay, no foul, official's time out, A10 leaves the game for one down, clock starts on RFP.
-
There is NO clear proof of targeting or head shot here. We need to stop calling flags on what we assume happens and call them on what we know.
Jerry Markbright has a book and he speaks to this issue very clearly in one of the chapters. Stop calling what you think happened and only call what you know happen. Officiating is NOT a guessing game. Save that for the basketball officials.
-
Officiating is NOT a guessing game. Save that for the basketball officials.
Well that's a little unnecessary.
-
Let me ask this: same play, same movements, except in this case, the ball carrier strapped on his lid, and it doesn't come flying off. Now what?
I think you guys are getting suckered into a flag because the helmet came off... I see no targetting. I do see a hell of a hit, and the ball carrier wasn't prepared for it, yes, but I do not see helmet-to-helmet, nor do I see launching. I see a tiny bit of body-moving-upwards, but not in a way that suggests anything other than a human motion delivering a natural blow.