Targeting

[longislandcuse]

They need to fix this rule. James Burgess, Senior Linebacker for Louisville was just ejected in his final game, first play, for simply reacting. He led with his shoulder on a slant that was thrown right towards him and because he's 6 inches taller than the WR, had helmet contact and just like that, your college career is over.

Disgusting.

 

[Orangeman]

They need to fix this rule. James Burgess, Senior Linebacker for Louisville was just ejected in his final game, first play, for simply reacting. He led with his shoulder on a slant that was thrown right towards him and because he's 6 inches taller than the WR, had helmet contact and just like that, your college career is over. Disgusting.

It's a joke

Ruining kids' lives so adults feel slightly better about themselves

Shameful

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Orangeman]

I don't believe there's any contact with the head.

Embarrassing for the adults involved.

I think more people involved with sports both college and professional need to be fired more often

 

[longislandcuse]

I don't believe there's any contact with the head.

Embarrassing for the adults involved.

I think more people involved with sports both college and professional need to be fired more often

I don't believe there was either but even if there was, sometimes, if you're 6'2 and the WR is 5'8 and coming straight at you, what do you even do? The ejection piece needs much better discretion.

 

[Crusty]

Without commenting on the call, why is it the player's life is ruined? I assume his college career is over because he is a senior?

 

[Mr Peabody]

didn't see it live but the video clip above looks like targeting to me. trying to protect these players. his neck snapped back which could cause serious injury. not sure i understand the argument - receiver was defenseless whether or not the hit was to the head.

 

[Orangeman]

Without commenting on the call, why is it the player's life is ruined? I assume his college career is over because he is a senior?

His life isn't ruined, but he worked 10 years to have his last game taken away by idiotic adults

That was not targeting. If you have a problem with the hit, then you have a problem with the game and that's another discussion

Those who played a college sport would probably understand

 

[Orangeman]

didn't see it live but the video clip above looks like targeting to me. trying to protect these players. his neck snapped back which could cause serious injury. not sure i understand the argument - receiver was defenseless whether or not the hit was to the head.

You're asking a player to make a split second decision about whether a guy is defenseless catching a pass right over the middle where he's playing defense

The announcers declared he let up

Either shut the game down or call that a 15 yarder and move on

Tough way for a guy to end his career. The adults let him down, pretty simple

 

[OttoinGrotto]

didn't see it live but the video clip above looks like targeting to me. trying to protect these players. his neck snapped back which could cause serious injury. not sure i understand the argument - receiver was defenseless whether or not the hit was to the head.

That's how I see it too.

 

[CuseOnly]

didn't see it live but the video clip above looks like targeting to me. trying to protect these players. his neck snapped back which could cause serious injury. not sure i understand the argument - receiver was defenseless whether or not the hit was to the head.

The targeting rule specifically states contact above the shoulders whether that be with the helmet or shoulder of the defender or tackler. This is a terrible call for an ejection. Contact was clearly made below the shoulders of the offensove player and was made by the shoulder of the defensive player.

Awful call, just awful.

The fact that the offensive players head snapped forward and hit the defender is not targeting. Nor is it relevant that the kid's neck snapped back, I don't recall "neck snapping" in the targeting rule.

 

[rrlbees]

The right call. That was a vicious helmet to helmet hit. The slo mo validates it.

 

[longislandcuse]

The right call. That was a vicious helmet to helmet hit. The slo mo validates it.

Vicious...??? Ok...

Apparently this hit is some blue & white/white & gold dress type ish since I thought it was a clean play, others in this thread thought it was clean, the announcers thought it was clean yet a couple posters think it was targeting with one calling it "vicious".

 

[Toga]

You neglected to mention the receiver was already in the grasp of a different defensive player.

 

[rrlbees]

Vicious...??? Ok... Apparently this hit is some blue & white/white & gold dress type ish since I thought it was a clean play, others in this thread thought it was clean, the announcers thought it was clean yet a couple posters think it was targeting with one calling it "vicious".

Did you watch the slo mo that X posted? It's helmet to helmet.

 

[Mr Peabody]

The targeting rule specifically states contact above the shoulders whether that be with the helmet or shoulder of the defender or tackler. This is a terrible call for an ejection. Contact was clearly made below the shoulders of the offensove player and was made by the shoulder of the defensive player.

Awful call, just awful.

The fact that the offensive players head snapped forward and hit the defender is not targeting. Nor is it relevant that the kid's neck snapped back, I don't recall "neck snapping" in the targeting rule.

again, i didn't see it live and have only seen the clip. agree there is no 'neck snapping' penalty but i believe the rule among other items looks to protect against concussions and paralysis. also watching the clip above it looks like the defenders feet were off the ground when contact was made. i'm fairly confident the rules were put in place to protect rather than punish - and if the threat of getting tossed protects these young men, i'm all for it.

 

[Moontan]

As someone who didn't see the play, I find it interesting that there are people here who so vehemently defend both sides. I would've expected more comments of "too close to tell" and "if it isn't definitive then he shouldn't be ejected"... interesting.

 

[longislandcuse]

Did you watch the slo mo that X posted? It's helmet to helmet.

Yes, to me it looked like he led with his shoulder and hit him in the upper chest.

 

[longislandcuse]

As someone who didn't see the play, I find it interesting that there are people here who so vehemently defend both sides. I would've expected more comments of "too close to tell" and "if it isn't definitive then he shouldn't be ejected"... interesting.

I'm 6'3 and played linebacker in high school and have no idea how I would be expected to react when a 5'8-6'0 WR comes across the middle of the field. Even if I split second react and lower my shoulder I am 5-8 inches taller and my helmet might hit theirs without me intending to "target" them.

I hate, hate, hate the ejection portion of it.

 

[CuseOnly]

again, i didn't see it live and have only seen the clip. agree there is no 'neck snapping' penalty but i believe the rule among other items looks to protect against concussions and paralysis. also watching the clip above it looks like the defenders feet were off the ground when contact was made. i'm fairly confident the rules were put in place to protect rather than punish - and if the threat of getting tossed protects these young men, i'm all for it.

If my feet are off the ground as in this case and I make contact below the head area as in this case, it's not targeting by rule. Pretty cut and dried.

Bad call to end a kid's career on or otherwise.

 

[Orangeman]

The right call. That was a vicious helmet to helmet hit. The slo mo validates it.

This is wrong

I don't actually think the helmet was hit at all

Watch again

Go Su hoops

 

[rrlbees]

As someone who didn't see the play, I find it interesting that there are people here who so vehemently defend both sides. I would've expected more comments of "too close to tell" and "if it isn't definitive then he shouldn't be ejected"... interesting.

Watched it several more times. Receiver is in the grasp of another player and the second defender goes top of his helmet to the front of receivers helmet.

 

[Finwad32]

Targeting is a great call, problem is that officials typically have no idea how to assess it. Especially when replay isn't available.
The difference between natural reaction and maliciousness can be so minuscule that it's not always obvious at full speed.
I guess better safe than sorry, but, the accuracy % on this call has to be one of the lowest in the game.
In a lot of instances, the only one that may ever know is the perpetrator, and why lie, they're not admitting it freely on a consistent basis.

 

[atcar]

Watched it a bunch of times, slo mo sure looks like defender led with his right shoulder pad and hit the left shoulder pad of the receiver first. The receivers head snapped back.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

They need to fix this rule. James Burgess, Senior Linebacker for Louisville was just ejected in his final game, first play, for simply reacting. He led with his shoulder on a slant that was thrown right towards him and because he's 6 inches taller than the WR, had helmet contact and just like that, your college career is over.

Disgusting.

The also need to make it illegal for the offense to lead with their helmet.