Home
Forums
New Posts
Illini Basketball
Illini Football
Sports Talk
Log in
Register
What's new
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Sports
Illini Football
Wisconsin 25, Illinois 21 Postgame
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dkayak" data-source="post: 1953909" data-attributes="member: 749263"><p>Yeh, I saw that too. IMO targeting calls <strong>should</strong> reflect both intent and how much energy is imparted. Note that it was <strong>so subtle nobody even threw a flag for targeting</strong>. They called him for roughing the passer. When the review showed the roughing call was invalid (ball still in QB’s possession), they said “hey, look, the helmets bumped”. Otherwise it would have been a sack and fumble. The game hinged substantially on ejecting a player for an incidental helmet bump so slight no official on the field even detected it live. If none of them saw it, was it really “targeting”.</p><p></p><p>My interpretation is he wasn’t trying to lead with his helmet at all, but his head followed his focus on the ball (which was high too), with > 90% of the energy transmitted via hands and torso. Maybe the NCAA should clarify their definition. Or maybe it should be renamed “helmet contact” and called for every bump.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dkayak, post: 1953909, member: 749263"] Yeh, I saw that too. IMO targeting calls [B]should[/B] reflect both intent and how much energy is imparted. Note that it was [B]so subtle nobody even threw a flag for targeting[/B]. They called him for roughing the passer. When the review showed the roughing call was invalid (ball still in QB’s possession), they said “hey, look, the helmets bumped”. Otherwise it would have been a sack and fumble. The game hinged substantially on ejecting a player for an incidental helmet bump so slight no official on the field even detected it live. If none of them saw it, was it really “targeting”. My interpretation is he wasn’t trying to lead with his helmet at all, but his head followed his focus on the ball (which was high too), with > 90% of the energy transmitted via hands and torso. Maybe the NCAA should clarify their definition. Or maybe it should be renamed “helmet contact” and called for every bump. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Sports
Illini Football
Wisconsin 25, Illinois 21 Postgame
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…