|
Replies: 26
| visibility 6,694
|
Hall of Famer [21024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13549
Joined: 9/15/05
|
Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 8:46 AM
|
|
I am obviously all for player safety, but they need to examine intent when deciding whether or not to eject a player from a game. Yes, Muse hit with the crown of his helmet, but Lamar was falling and Muse was airborne before the hit. You can not adjust to that while trying to make a tackle.
Should it have been targeting? By definition...yes. But at the same time there should be more attention paid to if it is intentional or just part of a football play. Muse was trying to make a diving tackle. There was no intent to make helmet to helmet contact.
The rule needs to be reviewed and amended. It's the worst rule in sports other than having to hit out of someone else's divot in your own fairway in golf...haha!!
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [21722]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13534
Joined: 11/8/13
|
Yet you can close line a qb in a national championship game...
Sep 17, 2017, 8:51 AM
|
|
And still keep playing.
Seems fair.
Intent does need to be added into the discussion. But refs can't even spot the ball right 84% of the time, so they would screw up determining intent, too.
~JKB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16472]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11652
Joined: 9/1/01
|
Definitely a bad rule as currently implemented. Also needs
Sep 17, 2017, 8:52 AM
|
|
to apply to Alabama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [889]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 1329
Joined: 6/23/05
|
Muse had his head down. Pop warner teaches kids tackle with your head up.
Sep 17, 2017, 8:56 AM
|
|
I agree the rule is killing football, but muse was leading with crown of helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3290]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4049
Joined: 1/3/14
|
Re: Muse had his head down. Pop warner teaches kids tackle with your head up.
Sep 17, 2017, 9:25 AM
|
|
So outlaw body block tackles? He dove to where he thought he would cut the runner down but Jackson's head got there first. If it is the rule call it on NC St and Alabama!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111433]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73692
Joined: 9/10/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2663]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 4303
Joined: 1/4/07
|
right. and gun safety is ruining the sport of hunting.
Sep 17, 2017, 9:08 AM
|
|
it's much more fun to fire at movement than it is to be certain what you are firing at. In football, keep your head up when you tackle. If you can't see what you are tackling, don't tackle! In the old days, every year in high school football, some kid somewhere in South Carolina would break his neck executing a spear tackle on somebody. I'm glad for the rule. It isn't ruining the sport anymore than the chop block rule. Just learn and execute good technique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8172
Joined: 3/30/16
|
Re: right. and gun safety is ruining the sport of hunting.
Sep 17, 2017, 9:55 AM
|
|
Nice post v-hort
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38422]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33199
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:14 AM
|
|
I have said the same , there needs to be a call for "intentional targeting " and then another lesser penalty for " incidental helmet to helmet contact " .
Intentionally targeting a guy ( see Mike Williams in the 1st Q of the NCG ) should be an ejection and possibly a 2 game suspension.
What Tanner Muse did ? 15 yard penalty and a first down . Maybe the player misses the next play .
It is a too encompassing rule for something that clearly has a couple of different cause and effect statuses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [578]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 908
Joined: 11/29/15
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:21 AM
|
|
I disagree. The message needs to be keep your head up when you tackle. I like the rule as it is but wish it was called more often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111433]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73692
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:26 AM
[ in reply to Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football ] |
|
dug, the rule about not leading with the crown of the helmet is as much intended to protect the tackler as the guy being hit. These kids are taught to form tackle the day they enter pop warner, and yet some guys still need a reminder. Muse has been dipping his head all year and he finally got caught. It was the right call.
And to the OP, get over yourself. it take a must take a lot of hubris for you to think your personal enjoyment of the sport is more important than player safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13549
Joined: 9/15/05
|
Was the first sentence in my original post
Sep 17, 2017, 9:33 AM
|
|
Was the first sentence in my original post not saying that player safety was obviously very important? Maybe you should learn to read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111433]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73692
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Was the first sentence in my original post
Sep 17, 2017, 9:36 AM
|
|
I read your entire post, it is obvious you have no idea why the rule is in place. when guys lead with the crown of their helmet it can lead to compression neck injuries. Had Muse come in a split second later, he could have broken the kids jaw. You lead with you face-mask, period. I have no problem with this rule when applied properly, as it was last night. Some people only seem to have a problem with it when one of our players gets caught. If you were truly putting player safety first, you would not have a problem with the call last night.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [966]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8172
Joined: 3/30/16
|
Re: Was the first sentence in my original post
Sep 17, 2017, 9:58 AM
|
|
Pretty good point ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13605]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12896
Joined: 8/10/13
|
Re: Was the first sentence in my original post
Sep 17, 2017, 9:44 AM
[ in reply to Was the first sentence in my original post ] |
|
I bet I saw 20 plays yesterday (several games) where the player launched himself with the crown of his helmet yet only saw one guy ejected.
If its truly about the safety of the launching player, why not eject him no matter where he makes contact with the crown of his helmet?
Also, i believe, if its truly about player safety, the player hit should have to come out game and be examined before allowing to play another down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58379]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46316
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Any rule that dictates the ejection of Muse in last night's
Sep 17, 2017, 9:28 AM
|
|
game is a horrible rule - period. There are many similar instances, but this could be used as a singular example in a case to rip this rule out by the roots, re-examine it, and come up with something that protects players as much as possible yet accepts the reality that testosterone fueled aggression and violent physical contact are integral, necessary components of football. Muse was excessively punished for making what amounts to a clean, natural, spontaneous football tackle. That is wrong, and it should not be swept under the rug, but acknowledged and corrected for the good of the game. Don't make something into a crime when none is committed, and when a real crime is committed, make the punishment fit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [889]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 879
Joined: 8/24/13
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:28 AM
|
|
Intent is a hard thing to judge sometimes which is why the rule is clear: do not lead with the crown of the helmet. It's a dangerous play for both the tackler and the player getting tackled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3821]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4418
Joined: 1/27/03
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:31 AM
|
|
It's about player safety. He lowered the crown of his helmet so it was targeting. Right call & deserves to be ejected. It doesn't matter the intent or if the offensive player moves the damage is still done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40738]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10675
Joined: 6/23/17
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:32 AM
|
|
There has to be a distinction between intentional and incidental targeting just like the face mask rule. The Muse play was clearly incidental and should not have resulted in an ejection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [227]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 249
Joined: 10/27/16
|
Excuse the soccer comparison but
Sep 17, 2017, 9:38 AM
|
|
I think the first targeting call on a player should be a 15 yard penalty + auto 1st down and a warning (like a yellow card). But if you do it again, then it should be a 2nd yellow card which results in an automatic ejection. However, if it's a REALLY dangerous and reckless targeting penalty, it should be an automatic ejection (similar to a straight red card in soccer). In my opinion, what Muse did would be considered a "yellow card" offense and if he did it again, he should be ejected. Apologies if that's too much soccer talk for everyone lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [54011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21055
Joined: 11/6/14
|
I don't always like the calls and think the officials need to be more consistent.
Sep 17, 2017, 9:49 AM
|
|
But if Muse hits a little harder and possibly suffers a compression injury, he might not walk off that field himself or ever again for that matter. While the officials have screwed Clemson in the past, I believe they made the right call last night.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8172
Joined: 3/30/16
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:52 AM
|
|
Temitch, I think you are spot on BUT about half of them have such a fine line between whether there was intent (or not intent) that the refs couldn't really make a judgement call.
I believe that out of concern for safety their intent is to force the defender to never lead with the crown in any situation. Thus your point....football won't be the same.
Heck, they will eventually take the kick return away from us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:56 AM
|
|
An we talk about targeting on McCloud on the first or second series and no call?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:58 AM
|
|
While I somewhat agree. Rules that are subjective tend to be the ones that cause the most controversial calls
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8172
Joined: 3/30/16
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 10:05 AM
|
|
MackDaddy, simply put and to the point(in a nutshell as some say).
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1418]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 993
Joined: 9/23/09
|
Re: Can we talk about how the targeting rule is ruining football
Sep 17, 2017, 9:59 AM
|
|
I don't love the rule or the random calling of it. However, I understand the rule and what the powers to be are trying to do. Football is under attack and if we want to enjoy the sport in 20 years, changes like this have to be made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 26
| visibility 6,694
|
|
|
50
