Not disagreeing that the play was called correctly. But the Miami player lost his balance which caused his head to change level and putting it directly in the path of Jewel's head who was attempting a perfectly legal crack back block. Had he not stumbled, there would have been no helmet to helmet contact. Fact, he did stumble, which caused his head to change elevation and be contacted by Jewel's helmet. Flag was then thrown, correctly I might add, and penalty with ejection was the penalty. But to say it was intentional is laughable if you have played football at any level in your life.
Jewell's helmet to helmet was
- Thread starter terrehawk
- Start date
I don't think his intent was to get him in the head, I believe the stumble caused it. That said, he did get him in the head so he should be ejected by rule. It's a tough rule and if you are a big hitter it might happen to you once or twice in your career.
It was a complete bone head play. There was no reason to even touch the guy.
I think you're misinterpreting the definition of what a crack back is...what Josey did was a "blind-side block" and is illegal and would've resulted in a 15 yard personal foul. A crack back block is only legal above the waist (he was) and within seven yards of the line of scrimage (he was not)...it's been a rule for several years.
Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
Examples (Rule 2-27-14):
- A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
- A receiver attempting to catch a 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.
- 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.
That's the way Jewell plays the game and 100% at all times is what made him into a very good player.Did he mean to go helmet to helmet no way but did he want a huge hit yep
Whether the player should be considered a "defenseless" player or not is the main issue I think (whether it was a "blind side block"). Jewell came in at about a 45 degree angle so it seems like the Miami player should have seen Jewell in his peripheral vision. If he wasn't "defenseless" it wasn't targeting because Jewell hit him with his shoulder and the side of his helmet (not the crown of his helmet). The other player initiated contact with the crown of his helmet.
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
The Call was fine.
The 15 yard penalty was fine.
The ejection was fine.
Those are hits that people don't get up from....for the rest of their lives.
I'm 100% thankful that kid got up, and will be able to live the rest of his life.
Maybe I'm being dramatic...but everyone should be thankful both players were ok.
The 15 yard penalty was fine.
The ejection was fine.
Those are hits that people don't get up from....for the rest of their lives.
I'm 100% thankful that kid got up, and will be able to live the rest of his life.
Maybe I'm being dramatic...but everyone should be thankful both players were ok.
A
anon_01irjibf16qqj
Guest
"Defenseless" is the key term. I realized they hit heads, but the fact the Miami of Ohio player had no chance to protect himself is why it was called. Nasty play and sucks! Seems like the refs are calling it more this year.
Does he have to sit out vs ISU??
Does he have to sit out vs ISU??
That's what I'm saying...they are calling that a defensless 15 yarder even if he is pure shoulder to chest. I believe he would only have to sit out the first half of ISU had the hit come in the second half of the Miami game. He should be good to go first snap against ISU...
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
Jewell shouldn't have been blocking. King was already by him. Let the Miami kid go. He ain't catchin' King. Never block behind the ball. Period.
The rule was correctly enforced, but Jewell has never been involved in a play like that. He's not a dirty player, and I'm confident it won't happen again.
If you want to see a real football thug, check out the LSU guy's malicious, premeditated decapitation attempt on the Wisconsin lad who had the gall to intercept an LSU pass and seal its doom. THAT kid ought to be banned for at least the next game. And yet Les Miles...and that slimeball Brian Griese on TV...are spinning it like it was just one of those things. No big deal. Hell, the young man is emotional and plays hard... Ah, the SEC and its
sycophants. What a crock.
And one last thing: Where was the targeting rule in the BIG championship game last year? That was egregious helmet-to-helmet on a defenseless Iowa receiver in the end zone that, one could easily argue, cost Iowa the BIG title and a playoff berth. That NEVER should be missed, and especially not in a game of that magnitude.
When targeting is enforced every time it occurs, it will be a much better rule.
The rule was correctly enforced, but Jewell has never been involved in a play like that. He's not a dirty player, and I'm confident it won't happen again.
If you want to see a real football thug, check out the LSU guy's malicious, premeditated decapitation attempt on the Wisconsin lad who had the gall to intercept an LSU pass and seal its doom. THAT kid ought to be banned for at least the next game. And yet Les Miles...and that slimeball Brian Griese on TV...are spinning it like it was just one of those things. No big deal. Hell, the young man is emotional and plays hard... Ah, the SEC and its
sycophants. What a crock.
And one last thing: Where was the targeting rule in the BIG championship game last year? That was egregious helmet-to-helmet on a defenseless Iowa receiver in the end zone that, one could easily argue, cost Iowa the BIG title and a playoff berth. That NEVER should be missed, and especially not in a game of that magnitude.
When targeting is enforced every time it occurs, it will be a much better rule.
Actually, and this is really the case here, the LSU lineman was unaware the play was not over (you can see he was engaged with a Wisconsin defender), and just saw the guy start running, after he had gotten back up (which he did not see).
When he went to the sidelines you could see him jawing with Wisconsin players, which is probably for two reasons, one being.....he is being confronted by a bunch of Wisconsin players, and let his emotions get the better of him, and two, he had laid a big hit on the guy that picked off the pass and thought they were simply angry that he made the tackle as hard as he did (not late).
After that, his coaches and teammates looked like they were talking to him on the sidelines and you can see he was confused and shaking his head. When he got to the bench one of his teammates came over and looked like he was explaining what happened, and the LSU player immediately threw his towel over his head and put his head in his hands.
He's a big dumb animal yes. But as far as premeditated assault goes, I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt based on his reactions and body language on the sideline.
It was the correct call and his stupidity does not excuse him, but I'm guessing there won't be any further punishment beyond that.
The people who say Jewell shouldn't have blocked him because King was already passed him are ridiculous. All it takes is one defender to force a cutback and the guy may have had a play. It occurred 70 yards from the endzone.
In the open field, you have to block with your head in front. If an official see the blocker's head go to the back, there will likely be a flag for a block in the back. As many others have stated, if the guy doesn't trip and stumble over the 25-yard line, it would have been chest to shoulder.
To avoid getting called for blindside hits, our staff teaches our kids to yell before blocking a kid like that. It gives the kid enough time to turn and look (and avoid a blindside call), but still not enough to avoid the block.
In the open field, you have to block with your head in front. If an official see the blocker's head go to the back, there will likely be a flag for a block in the back. As many others have stated, if the guy doesn't trip and stumble over the 25-yard line, it would have been chest to shoulder.
To avoid getting called for blindside hits, our staff teaches our kids to yell before blocking a kid like that. It gives the kid enough time to turn and look (and avoid a blindside call), but still not enough to avoid the block.
I disagree with the posters who are saying that Josey shouldn't have blocked him because King already had gone by. If King has to slow down for any traffic ahead that guy is right back in the play. It was bad luck for both players, nothing more.
edit----posted at the same time.....guess I wasn't the only one who thought this
edit----posted at the same time.....guess I wasn't the only one who thought this
He lead with helmet, end of story.
If they do not change the rules to protect players their will b no future for football. Head injuries are debilitating and for life, grow up, The players can adapt
Appeared to lead with crown of helmet. Josey is better than that. The kid was tripping for several steps before the block.. No one is gonna hear a yell in Kinnick
I think it would be more appropriate if it were treated more like a yellow card in soccer. It could carry over to a number of games to keep players conscious of the rules.
At least half of helmet-to-helmet hits occur when the "targeted" player's helmet level changes unpredictably and/or unexpectedly. Ejecting a player for one incident is usually too severe.
At least half of helmet-to-helmet hits occur when the "targeted" player's helmet level changes unpredictably and/or unexpectedly. Ejecting a player for one incident is usually too severe.
You either never played, or played so long ago you have forgotten how fast a game is. And players within five yards of one another can hear.
I love the Hawkeye Kool-Aid as much as anyone but if you're trying to defend Josey on that play you should probably sober up. That was the most black and white targeting call I've ever seen.
It was a nasty looking hit.....and I would say an unintentional hit, but a necessary call.
The speed of the game is to blame.
Three possible solutions.
1. Make the players wear flip-flops instead of cleats.
2. Mandatory natural turf.
3. Both 1 & 2.
In other news....
Angels pitcher Matt Shoemaker had his melon cracked by a "frozen rope off-bat". He will spend the night in the hospital.
The speed of the game is to blame.
Three possible solutions.
1. Make the players wear flip-flops instead of cleats.
2. Mandatory natural turf.
3. Both 1 & 2.
In other news....
Angels pitcher Matt Shoemaker had his melon cracked by a "frozen rope off-bat". He will spend the night in the hospital.
Last edited:
In a perfect world, I'd agree with you that there should be some leeway when it comes to intent. Josie clearly had no intent to target, since he put his head down while the player was still upright, and the player subsequently stumbled thus dropping his head right into Josie's helmet.
Since we don't have that, opening up this rule to interpretation of intent, would be a disaster, IMO. It would: 1) slow the game down even further, as refs would have to look for both targeting and have to figure out whether it was intended or not; 2) open up the refs' decisions to more scrutiny than it already has, making an already difficult job even harder; 3) allow players to make it look unintentional - what if it was Josie who "stumbled" into the player? Most importantly, opening up the rule to asses intent would partially defeat the rule's purpose of trying to make the game safer, because it could potentially allow for helmet to helmet contact under circumstances of it being unintentional.
Football must do everything it can to make the game safer, while doing everything it can to preserve the integrity of the game. If it doesn't, the game may not be around much longer. I can tell you that we are seeing significant drops in the numbers of kids playing HS football in our conference (Iowa 4A), and I think it's due in large part to head injury concerns.
Jewel actually led with his shoulders and did everything pretty text book there. His head was up and his shoulders were out front. It just so happens given the human anatomy that wherever your shoulders lead your head is not too far behind... It was the stumbling and bumbling Miami player who was leading with his head, which can happen if you're losing your balance.
I really don't know what Jewel could have done there other than to dodge the Miami player altogether, but that's not football.
I love how we can watch a play like that in slow motion and make all sorts of suggestions about what Jewel should have done like reality plays out in super slow motion. If Jewel is suspend for next week, that's a crime IMO.
It's a good rule and the penalty is just, even if the hit is unintentional. We are dealing with young men's health here.
The notion that incidental helmet to helmet contact can be completely removed from the game if everyone just follows the proper safe technique is laughable.
Safe driving on icy roads won't eliminate all car accidents either.
I don't mind the 15 yard (unfair) penalty to reinforce the safety point, but ejecting a player and suspending him for something that was generally outside of his control and really had more to do with the Miami player's inability to have decent body control is really unfair.
I am confident Chris Borland would dispute your characterization of all those concerned about sports related head injuries as being part of the "PC/wussification crowd."
BTW, a DI official told me before the start of last season, they were instructed that intent was irrelevant with regard to targeting.
This. Uncontrollable Circumstances (player stumbling) can lead to unintended consequences. It's the way the game is called today.
Those that claim this was an easy call don't know the rule. The call was not based on whether Jewell lead with his helmet or not. If the Miami player is considered a "defenseless" player, and Jewell hit him in the head or neck even with his shoulder, it still could be considered targeting since contact was initiated to the head or neck of a defenseless player. That's why the big question is whether the Miami player should have been considered "defenseless" or not. If it was a blind-side block, he was defenseless by rule and it also could be called targeting even if Jewell hit him with his shoulder. If the other player is leaning forward and leading with his helmet, it might be pretty hard to avoid.
Last edited:
Defenseless was the term that everyone needs to know. This isn't the last time you will see this called. I am guessing you see a HUGE increase in players getting ejected. They "rules committee" wants all hits to be at the waist. So anytime a player goes high on a defenseless player this will be called. Anytime a player goes high period will be result in this. I could not believe the # of players who got ejected this past weekend. I would say about 90% deserved it because they did go high and the helmets hit. There were a couple of head scratchers that I am sure will get reviewed. I did not notice, were there any "booth" ejections?
The whole target zone needs to be lowered for all players. Jewell was going in to make a good block, but regardless it would of been called a PF hit on a defenseless player. Blindside or crack back blocks are both out of the game now. If you make one, you are most likely going to end up with a penalty.
The whole target zone needs to be lowered for all players. Jewell was going in to make a good block, but regardless it would of been called a PF hit on a defenseless player. Blindside or crack back blocks are both out of the game now. If you make one, you are most likely going to end up with a penalty.
I think the "lead with the shoulders and not the head" will be forever problematic due to the anatomical fact of the head being above the shoulders. Obviously, the head cannot be behind the shoulders when lunging forward.
I think the rule should be that one must always lead with the hands. Let's face it, that was a vicious blow to that young man's head regardless of intent (I don't think Jewel meant to hit him in the helmet). He could have been paralyzed or worse.
For those of you in the anti-"wussification" crowd, you seriously need to reexamine your values. Football has become more dangerous because the athletes have become so much stronger and faster. The game can be adapted to that and still be enjoyable to watch.
I think the rule should be that one must always lead with the hands. Let's face it, that was a vicious blow to that young man's head regardless of intent (I don't think Jewel meant to hit him in the helmet). He could have been paralyzed or worse.
For those of you in the anti-"wussification" crowd, you seriously need to reexamine your values. Football has become more dangerous because the athletes have become so much stronger and faster. The game can be adapted to that and still be enjoyable to watch.
I guess if you're a complete puss it was a "horror to observe". The guy was back on his feet before Jewell got off the field. Sounds to me like you should start watching checkers or badminton or something. You're way to delicate to watch football.It was a horror to observe and a sham on humanity. An egregious injustice upon the poor player that suffered such a misfortune.
Is that about what you were going for?
Yeah well, "slow motion with benefit of hindsight" appears to be the way plays are called these days. Everybody screams for more instant replay and these are the results.
