Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
Walk-On [131]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 120
Joined: 2/20/13
|
Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 3:33 PM
|
|
To me that targeting call was BS. If Bell would not have dropped his head then no contact would have been made to the helmet. If anything it should be called on both.
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [923]
TigerPulse: 64%
Posts: 2101
Joined: 12/30/19
|
Agree there needs to be some "Common Sense" from the
Nov 30, 2022, 3:33 PM
|
|
offensive players dropping their helmets etc....
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3732]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 4859
Joined: 11/4/03
|
They basically want the offensive player to be able to…
Nov 30, 2022, 5:54 PM
|
|
…drive THEIR helmet straight into the defensive player, no holes barred.
While in Mickens case, he had his head lowered to apparently PREVENT targeting the offensive player, only to have the offensive player LOWER HIS HELMET (Mickens would be UNABLE to see or react to this in sub-second time) and blast into Mickens.
Then, Mickens is ejected from the game and into the NEXT game.
What a sweet deal for the offense. In fact, that should be a strategy to get rid of secondary defensive players.
This was a TEXTBOOK case on how an offensive player can EASILY get a secondary defender ejected for targeting, OR, just get a seriously good helmet lick on the secondary player, making that defender think twice about coming to tackle him on the next go around.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19640]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17292
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 3:36 PM
|
|
Contact to the helmet is irrelevant in targeting calls. If a player leads with the crown of their own helmet it is targeting whether they hit another player in the helmet or their pinky toe. It was definitely targeting
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [131]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 120
Joined: 2/20/13
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 3:41 PM
|
|
The curve of the helmet above the facemask is considered the crown of the helmet. Anytime a tackle is made and a player has contact with their helmet then you could justify the crown struck the player. The targeting rule needs to be modified.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1703]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 2030
Joined: 6/27/13
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:17 PM
|
|
Crown striking the player isn't enough. The rule is forcible contact leading with the crown. The targeting rule has been modified ad nauseum. It doesn't need further modification, it just needs consistent enforcement.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1123]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1429
Joined: 2/5/10
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Targeting Call on Mickens ] |
|
In practice it’s never called unless helmet to helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19640]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17292
Joined: 7/25/07
|
They've been calling crown of the helmet contact for years
Nov 30, 2022, 5:10 PM
|
|
regardless of impact location.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4286]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5466
Joined: 2/20/18
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 3:41 PM
|
|
There should an official call after review before the next players game to make a final determination on play or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3681]
TigerPulse: 51%
Posts: 2396
Joined: 4/12/01
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 3:57 PM
|
|
agree
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27400]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31839
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 4:18 PM
|
|
I didn’t think it was targeting. He appeared to use the side of his helmet rather than the crown. I am basing this on what I saw at the game and the replay on the screen,
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20080]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16763
Joined: 11/28/00
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:18 PM
|
|
I was at home watching on tv but I had the same assessment as you. It seemed he was trying to twist in order to face his opponent and make the tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [275]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 399
Joined: 1/6/16
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 4:33 PM
|
|
Its lame but its still targeting, the problem is they don't account for the runner twisting and turning,
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [80319]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13168
Joined: 9/24/18
|
+1 for “should be called on both” . . .
Nov 30, 2022, 5:14 PM
|
|
I’ve never understood why it is permissible for an offensive player to “lead with the crown of the helmet”?!!!
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1703]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 2030
Joined: 6/27/13
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:16 PM
|
|
Contact to the helmet of the offensive player didn't matter for the call as the offensive player was not defenseless. It was called based on lowering and leading with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting regardless of where you contact the offensive player.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20080]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16763
Joined: 11/28/00
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:25 PM
|
|
But...if the OFFENSIVE PLAYER lowers his head and leads with the crown of his helmet, it's NOT TARGETING.
This is one big discrepancy that needs to be looked at if the point of the rule is protecting players from head & neck/spinal injuries.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1207]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 2255
Joined: 12/25/03
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:18 PM
|
|
Targeting needs to be done away with as a penalty.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1649]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 1329
Joined: 12/16/10
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:23 PM
|
|
They're trying to stop leading with the crown of the helmet to prevent injuries to the hitter, not the recipient of the hit. At least that's the explanation from a few years ago when Skalski got tossed in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27400]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31839
Joined: 8/19/03
|
It’s a call that is difficult to make correctly…..
Nov 30, 2022, 5:42 PM
|
|
If it appears that a player deliberately lowers his head to connect with the ball carriers head .. that should be a penalty. I don’t think two per cent of the calls are intentionally done. I can see this rule changed. Very difficult on the refs too,
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4544]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4186
Joined: 5/28/99
|
Re: Targeting Call on Mickens
Nov 30, 2022, 5:44 PM
|
|
I think sometimes they choose to ignore defenseless player part. A runner lowering his head as he advances the ball isn’t defenseless. No matter what part of the defenders helmet touches him. Watching Watson get destroyed against Alabama in 2017 as he tried to slide, those were defenseless. No calls of course.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94277]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95536
Joined: 12/25/09
|
The safe and legal way to tackle is...
Nov 30, 2022, 5:52 PM
|
|
face mask toward target. Mickens put his head down and the top of his helmet toward target. That is the definition of targeting.
The players' reason for putting the crown down is that a direct hit on the ball causes a fumble. Imo, if it can be seen as the exclusive reason for leading with the crown then the call should not be targeting.
Ball carriers drop their heads because it protects their bodies and the ball from a direct hit.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|