RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: El Macman on April 30, 2012, 03:32:49 PM
-
Pretty 'duh' stuff, but it is good that RR is making such a strong effort to achieve a national concensus on this, and all aspects of NCAA football officiating. The part about "Hints to Players" is a bit humorous.
TARGETING AND CROWN-OF-HELMET
OFFICIATING GUIDELINES
RULES
Targeting/Initiating Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)
No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6.)
Defenseless Player: Contact to Head or Neck Area (Rule 9-1-4)
No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6).
KEY ELEMENTS
Targeting—taking aim at an opponent with an apparent intent that goes beyond making a good football play.
Crown of the Helmet—the top portion of the helmet.
Contact to the head or neck area—even if not with the helmet, it still could be a foul.
Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
Examples (Rule 2-27-14):
Pass receiver or kick receiver concentrating on the ball before or just as it arrives.
Pass receiver or kick receiver who has just caught the ball and has not had time to do something common to the game.
Quarterback in the act of passing.
Any player who is blind-sided.
A player obviously out of the play.
KEY INDICATORS
Risk of a foul is high with one or more of these:
Launch—a player leaves his feet to contact an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body, making contact in the head/neck area
Leading with forearm, fist, hand or elbow to the head/neck area
Lowering the head before initiating contact to the head/neck area of a defenseless player
These indicate less risk of a foul:
Heads-up tackle
Wrap-up tackle
HINTS FOR PLAYERS
Don’t lead with your head
Don’t go for the head/neck area
-
clarifies this:
Any player who is blind-sided.
-
clarifies this:
Any player who is blind-sided.
Does it really clarify it? Surely they don't mean ANY player who doesn't see the blocker coming, do they?
-
Does it really clarify it? Surely they don't mean ANY player who doesn't see the blocker coming, do they?
No, not ANY player. But, when a player is just following a play, or is away from a play and unsuspecting of a "blindside" hit, and an opponent takes adavantage of that by blasting him, that's a foul. We saw an example of that in a video put up on this site recently. An offensive lineman well behind the point of attack was following the action as it moved downfield, and a defensicve player saw an opportunity for a fairly big hit, and blasted the guy. It looked to be an otherwise legal side block, but it had no purpose other than to puinish the defenseless opponent. Flag it. (See Film from Sweden by Korean_Hap).
-
No, not ANY player. But, when a player is just following a play, or is away from a play and unsuspecting of a "blindside" hit, and an opponent takes adavantage of that by blasting him, that's a foul. We saw an example of that in a video put up on this site recently. An offensive lineman well behind the point of attack was following the action as it moved downfield, and a defensicve player saw an opportunity for a fairly big hit, and blasted the guy. It looked to be an otherwise legal side block, but it had no purpose other than to puinish the defenseless opponent. Flag it. (See Film from Sweden by Korean_Hap).
Am I looking at this incorrectly? With respect to 'blind sided', I think it's saying, these players should ESPECIALLY be protected vis a vis the head and neck area. I don't think a play like someone chasing a punt return who simply gets 'decleated' is worthy of a foul BUT if it's at all suspicious for being high, it's a foul.
BTW, being 'blind sided' and being 'out of the play' may be, but are not always, the same thing.
-
Am I looking at this incorrectly? With respect to 'blind sided', I think it's saying, these players should ESPECIALLY be protected vis a vis the head and neck area. I don't think a play like someone chasing a punt return who simply gets 'decleated' is worthy of a foul BUT if it's at all suspicious for being high, it's a foul.
BTW, being 'blind sided' and being 'out of the play' may be, but are not always, the same thing.
This is the way I'm reading it.
-
I led you to the well, but I can't make you drink the water.
-
No, not ANY player. But, when a player is just following a play, or is away from a play and unsuspecting of a "blindside" hit, and an opponent takes adavantage of that by blasting him, that's a foul.
Aren't these covered by the "obviously out of play" clause? If so, why add a separate "any player" clause, which isn't actually "any" player, but "some" players?
I read this meaning that any blind-side hit to the head-neck area is a foul - and I actually agree with this, it is a big safety issue.
-
Agree with Kalle. The Big XII supervisor's comment on this hit, "You make a call like this you might get the national championship game." I don't consider this player to be "out of the play"
http://losangeles.sbnation.com/ucla-bruins/2011/9/18/2432746/ucla-bruins-vs-texas-longhorns-video-marquise-goodwin-andrew-abbott-hit
-
This Texas block certainly was not on someone out of the play, nor was it (despite the announcers), a "blind side" hit. It was, however, above the shoulders. Had the blocker gone lower, I think it would have been perfectly legal. The problem here was going high.
But the target for blocking is certainly smaller. He can't go below the waist (in this direction), nor above the shoulders. He's got about an 18-24" window he can hit.
-
Agree with Kalle. The Big XII supervisor's comment on this hit, "You make a call like this you might get the national championship game." I don't consider this player to be "out of the play"
http://losangeles.sbnation.com/ucla-bruins/2011/9/18/2432746/ucla-bruins-vs-texas-longhorns-video-marquise-goodwin-andrew-abbott-hit
That is an "apples to elephants" comparison. The Texas hit was a guy leading with his helmet and hitting above the shoulders - easy call if you see the whole thing. (By the way, he did get the national championship game - he's the best H on the planet). This had nothing to do with hitting a player out of the play.
And, the previous discussion was more comparing apples to bananas. Any hit initated above the shoulders is gonna draw a flag, regardless if the guy getting hit sees it coming or not. That's not a pure 9-1-12-b hitting a player obviously out of the play. The play Korean_Hap presented is a perfect, PERFECT, PERFECT example of a 9-1-12-b foul - a classic "blind side" hit, as most everyone envisions something by that description. But that had nothing to do with contact above the shoulders. The Texas play was a perfect example of the fact that a guy can get "blind-sided" from the front. The defender was totally focused on the BC, and never saw the block coming. Had the block not been with the crown of the helmet and/or above the shoulders, it would have been legal.
Just take the term "blind side" out of your vocabulary. If the contact is with the crown of the helmet (anywhere on the opponent's body), above the opponent's shoulders, on an opponent obviously out of the play, or on a defenseless player, you've got a foul.
-
This is what I don't understand about how the rule is written... it states that no player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder.
This implies that it is legal to target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of an opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder so long that he's not classified as "defenseless". Is this true? I'm allowed to initiate contact to someone's head with my elbow in some circumstances?? If so, what would those circumstances be?
If that's not the case then why does the rule even mention a defenseless opponent?
-
The main reason is likely that if you call initiating contact/targeting a defenseless opponent it sets in motion a review by the conference for further sanctions. There are rules that cover blows to the helmet, head neck are against any player, defenseless or not - see rule 9-1-2-a for example. Also, there is the catchall that any other act of unnecessary roughness can be a personal foul.
-
Or possibilities like a DL doing a swim move and contacts the OL with his elbow.
Someone engaging in a block but the guy he wants to block ducks and the contact is forearm against the helmet.
-
Had a play last night and we all were curious what actually was violated in this scenario. It was pretty clear-cut on the foul because the hit ended the game(one team ended with 11 players and decided to forfeit), but we were all a little unsure whether we would classify this as targeting, defenseless receiver, or what?
A kickoff from the A35. Kicker A3 kicks an onside and the ball rolls to the A46 where B45 is waiting for the ball. At aroub the A44, the ball took a bounce into the air so B45 was looking up at it with his hands out waiting to receive it. Before the ball comes into his posession, A36 knocks the ever living crap out of B45, contacting his chest and head and driving him backwards onto the back of his head and knocking him out.
15-yard PF, no doubt, but under what specific classification would you call this?
-
Had a play last night and we all were curious what actually was violated in this scenario. It was pretty clear-cut on the foul because the hit ended the game(one team ended with 11 players and decided to forfeit), but we were all a little unsure whether we would classify this as targeting, defenseless receiver, or what?
A kickoff from the A35. Kicker A3 kicks an onside and the ball rolls to the A46 where B45 is waiting for the ball. At aroub the A44, the ball took a bounce into the air so B45 was looking up at it with his hands out waiting to receive it. Before the ball comes into his posession, A36 knocks the ever living crap out of B45, contacting his chest and head and driving him backwards onto the back of his head and knocking him out.
15-yard PF, no doubt, but under what specific classification would you call this?
If, as you say, there was contact above the shoulders, that's targeting a defenseless player, 9-1-4.
-
Cant you have defenseless player even without the contact above the shoulders?
-
Cant you have defenseless player even without the contact above the shoulders?
You can, but the rules don't specifically care about other contacts against a defenseless player.
-
If player A is carrying the ball near the sideline (lets say about 5 yards), sees defense player B coming his way and decides to get out of the field. As he is about a yard away of the sideline (still inbounds) he gets contacted by player B with the crown of his helmet to the side of his helmet. Should this be considered a penalty? Player A knew B was coming his way, lost sight of him while trying to get out of the field.
To be more clear about rule Rule 9-1-3.When hitting a ball carrier; It only doesn't apply when the contact with the crown of the helmet is casual? It applies only when it's clear that the defender is the one initiating the contact with the crown of his helmet to the carriers helmet? And if in question, it's a penalty?