Anyone see the “NO CALLS” from the USC -Washington State game?

[Hawkeyeinsoutherncalifornia]

There were 2 targeting calls that weren’t called then you get Amani Jones who clearly hit the shoulder pads of the Minny player.. it can go both ways.. no calls on the obvious and bullshit calls on the ones that shouldn’t be called in the first place

https://www.cougcenter.com/2018/9/22/17890080/wsu-vs-usc-targeting-gardner-minshew

 

[anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba]

That wasn't called?! Wow...the guy launched at the QB's head! That's textbook targeting.

And, of course, Jones was erroneously called for it last week while TWO Minnesota players made helmet-to-helmet textbook targeting hits, one on Easley and one on Kelly-Martin, that were NOT called. And KM is probably out this week with a concussion as a result. The guy Jones hit got up and walked off just fine.

With the replay booth, there is absolutely no excuse for such inconsistent enforcement of targeting.

 

[ThrowBones92]

That wasn't called?! Wow...the guy launched at the QB's head! That's textbook targeting.

And, of course, Jones was erroneously called for it last week while TWO Minnesota players made helmet-to-helmet textbook targeting hits, one on Easley and one on Kelly-Martin, that were NOT called. And KM is probably out this week with a concussion as a result. The guy Jones hit got up and walked off just fine.

With the replay booth, there is absolutely no excuse for such inconsistent enforcement of targeting.

Jones wasn't erroneously called for it. His hit met criteria for targeting.

 

[ThrowBones92]

There were 2 targeting calls that weren’t called then you get Amani Jones who clearly hit the shoulder pads of the Minny player.. it can go both ways.. no calls on the obvious and bullshit calls on the ones that shouldn’t be called in the first place

https://www.cougcenter.com/2018/9/22/17890080/wsu-vs-usc-targeting-gardner-minshew

View embedded media

Jones struck the shoulder with the crown of his helmet, which is also targeting. Anything you hit wit the crown of your helment is part of the targeting rule.

That hit from the USC player is pretty bad. Surprised it got missed.

 

[cheerscoach]

That wasn't called?! Wow...the guy launched at the QB's head! That's textbook targeting.

And, of course, Jones was erroneously called for it last week while TWO Minnesota players made helmet-to-helmet textbook targeting hits, one on Easley and one on Kelly-Martin, that were NOT called. And KM is probably out this week with a concussion as a result. The guy Jones hit got up and walked off just fine.

With the replay booth, there is absolutely no excuse for such inconsistent enforcement of targeting.

Minny did not have 2 "textbook" targeting hits, lol. The call on Jones was questionable, but your statement doesn't support the call at all. On Easley's TD reception, first he wasn't a defenseless player by any definition, and secondly no. 39 hits his head on the back of Easley's shoulder. Never came close to hitting his head. What is the second one you are referring to? I heard someone say that it was on Stone's interception. On that one, the WR turns his head and shoulders and leads with his shoulder to a ducking Stone. Isn't any official (or an Iowa coach) who would see that as targeting. It was a questionable call on Jones, but calm down.

 

[BurgHawk87]

That wasn't called?! Wow...the guy launched at the QB's head! That's textbook targeting.

And, of course, Jones was erroneously called for it last week while TWO Minnesota players made helmet-to-helmet textbook targeting hits, one on Easley and one on Kelly-Martin, that were NOT called. And KM is probably out this week with a concussion as a result. The guy Jones hit got up and walked off just fine.

With the replay booth, there is absolutely no excuse for such inconsistent enforcement of targeting.

I still have yet to see a replay of the alleged hit on easley that looks like anything more than a shoulder shrug as he falls in the end zone. Did their helmets kiss on the way down? Possibly. But in no way was that targeting. And if we're going by player reactions after the hit I'd say that Nick's "brush ya shoulders off" was pretty telling that it wasn't anything.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Jones struck the shoulder with the crown of his helmet, which is also targeting. Anything you hit wit the crown of your helment is part of the targeting rule.

I disagree, but only because I'm right, and I am too lazy to spend time explaining why I am right, so you're just gonna have to deal with it.........

Friends?

 

[cheerscoach]

I disagree, but only because I'm right, and I am too lazy to spend time explaining why I am right, so you're just gonna have to deal with it.........

Friends?

He got called because he lowered his head, period. It is the mitigating factor.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

He got called because he lowered his head, period. It is the mitigating factor.

The referees are mitigating factors.

 

[cheerscoach]

The referees are mitigating factors.

Well, I can't argue that. I probably misused the term in this instance. I guess him putting his head down is more of a aggravating factor. Thanks.

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

Jones wasn't erroneously called for it. His hit met criteria for targeting.

Based on what criteria?

 

[farhawks]

 

[anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba]

Jones wasn't erroneously called for it. His hit met criteria for targeting.

Uh, No, it didn't. Are you the booth official who confirmed it or just his mom?

If Jones' hit really was targeting, football would be finished as a sport. All Jones did was drive his shoulder into an opponent's chest. That IS NOT targeting in any way, shape, or form. If you can't do that, you can't play football. Period.

If you want to see what targeting really looks like, go back and review the hits on Easley and IKM--which, by the way, left IKM with a concussion and may keep him out of tomorrow's game. Both of those Minnesota hits were HELMET-to-HELMET--textbook targeting--yet neither one was flagged, and the review booth, incredibly, ignored both obvious calls as well. That's BS, and it stinks, no matter how you try to keep spinning it.

 

[ThrowBones92]

Based on what criteria?

Amani Jones lead with the crown of his helmet and struck the receiver in the chest/shoulder area with his crown. The video clearly shows this. Below is the rule definition, the review portion of the rule, and a case play from the NCAA rule book. All of it supports ejection of Jones's play.

Here is the definition of the the part of the rule that applies to Amani Jones' play:
"No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of his helmet...When in question, it is a foul."


Here is the review part of the rule from the NCAA rule book:
"The review includes all aspects of the targeting foul to ascertain whether there is at least one indicator of targeting action:
1) Whether the crown of the helmet is used to make forcible contact
OR
2) Whether there is forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent"

Case play from the NCAA Football rule book:
"Passer A12 inside the tackle box is looking for an open receiver. Before or just as he releases the ball, A12 is hit from the side at the ribs, thigh or knee by B79, who dives forward and leads with the crown (top) of his helmet.

RULING: Foul by B79 for targeting his opponent and initiating contact with the top of his helmet. 15 yards, first down. B79 is automatically disqualified"

 

[Kinnick.At.Night]

Throwbones has fresh novels out. Read up!

 

[ThrowBones92]

Uh, No, it didn't. Are you the booth official who confirmed it or just his mom?

If Jones' hit really was targeting, football would be finished as a sport. All Jones did was drive his shoulder into an opponent's chest. That IS NOT targeting in any way, shape, or form. If you can't do that, you can't play football. Period.

If you want to see what targeting really looks like, go back and review the hits on Easley and IKM--which, by the way, left IKM with a concussion and may keep him out of tomorrow's game. Both of those Minnesota hits were HELMET-to-HELMET--textbook targeting--yet neither one was flagged, and the review booth, incredibly, ignored both obvious calls as well. That's BS, and it stinks, no matter how you try to keep spinning it.

You think that only targeting occurs in helmet to helmet contact? There are two aspects to the targeting rule. I haven't seen those plays. You could be absolutely right. But the calling or non-calling of those calls has no bearing on whether this play is targeting or not.

I have no dog in this fight. I don't care who won or lost, who the officials were, whatever.

It was 100% a targeting play. I am not the official or his mom, I just know how to read a rule book. And it clearly states, as I've cited in this thread, that the play met criteria for targeting. If you lead with the crown of your helmet and strike the opponent ANYWHERE on the opponents body, it is targeting. The video is pretty clear he hit the receiver in the chest/shoulder with the crown of his helmet.

If you can please support why it is NOT targeting with the rule book, then I'll believe you. Otherwise, your just sharing your opinion, which has no bearing on any of this.You don't have to like the rule, but the referee's were correct and they will be supported by their coordinator for the call.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

"No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
• Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet"

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):

• 
  
  • A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
  • A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
  • A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
  • A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
  • A player on the ground.
  • A player obviously out of the play.
  • A player who receives a blind-side block.
  • A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
  • A quarterback any time after a change of possession.
  • A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feet-first

 

[CAhawki]

Pac 12 might have the worst refs of the 2 major college sports.

 

[WildTurk]

If only the Nebraska "blackshirts" knew how to target someone they might actually win a game!

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

Amani Jones lead with the crown of his helmet and struck the receiver in the chest/shoulder area with his crown. The video clearly shows this. Below is the rule definition, the review portion of the rule, and a case play from the NCAA rule book. All of it supports ejection of Jones's play.

Here is the definition of the the part of the rule that applies to Amani Jones' play:
"No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of his helmet...When in question, it is a foul."


Here is the review part of the rule from the NCAA rule book:
"The review includes all aspects of the targeting foul to ascertain whether there is at least one indicator of targeting action:
1) Whether the crown of the helmet is used to make forcible contact
OR
2) Whether there is forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent"

Case play from the NCAA Football rule book:
"Passer A12 inside the tackle box is looking for an open receiver. Before or just as he releases the ball, A12 is hit from the side at the ribs, thigh or knee by B79, who dives forward and leads with the crown (top) of his helmet.

RULING: Foul by B79 for targeting his opponent and initiating contact with the top of his helmet. 15 yards, first down. B79 is automatically disqualified"

That's not what I saw at all. I saw him hit the guy in the chest with his shoulder.

 

[WildTurk]

The video does NOT CLEARLY show Jones hit the reciever with the crown of his hit helmet. Watch the video again in slow motion

 

[cheerscoach]

The video does NOT CLEARLY show Jones hit the reciever with the crown of his hit helmet. Watch the video again in slow motion

did he lower his head? Absolutely. That's what they called, get over it.

 

[WildTurk]

did he lower his head? Absolutely. That's what they called, get over it.

You started posting here a few days ago to "test" the boards knowledge and to get a rise out of people. For an old retired guy, that is supposed to be wise and calm, you sure come off douchey. Relax

I was just acknowledging that the crown of Amani's helmet didn't hit the chest/shoulder area of the reciever as ThrowBones92 said "clearly" happend. Amani's shoulder did the work

 

[citizenHawk]

Yeah, from that backside angle on the receiver you can see the crown of Jones' helmet upon contact. Sort of nullifies any argument for targeting. It was a hard football play. That's it.

 

[cheerscoach]

You started posting here a few days ago to "test" the boards knowledge and to get a rise out of people. For an old retired guy, that is supposed to be wise and calm, you sure come off douchey. Relax

I was just acknowledging that the crown of Amani's helmet didn't hit the chest/shoulder area of the reciever as ThrowBones92 said "clearly" happend. Amani's shoulder did the work

I'm sorry if I offended you 'wildturk'. My statement was wise and calm. You apparently are very sensitive. I will try to keep that in mind when addressing you. Once again, so sorry for upsetting you.

 

[WildTurk]

I'm sorry if I offended you 'wildturk'. My statement was wise and calm. You apparently are very sensitive. I will try to keep that in mind when addressing you. Once again, so sorry for upsetting you.

The passive aggressive approach. Classic message board attempt. I see you

 

[cheerscoach]

The passive aggressive approach. Classic message board attempt. I see you

Maybe I'm just a pleasant fellow? I don't have a lot of message board experience, so I'm a little ignorant on what is classic.

 

[WildTurk]

Maybe I'm just a pleasant fellow? I don't have a lot of message board experience, so I'm a little ignorant on what is classic.

You will get there. Plenty of time on your hands now

 

[El Simbolo]

So if you lower your head and hit with your shoulder (at shoulder level or below) it’s targeting?

 

[El Simbolo]

Anyone have quick link to hit on IKM? Or remember what point in game it happened? I don’t recall it at all.