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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
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.
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.