Nice to see the targeting never happend!
- Thread starter Rebel1986
- Start date
Wow. I'm proud of the way the kids played. It wasn't until about the third quarter did I realize that I was sitting directly behind Rosen's parents. That kid is so overrated.
The twits calling the game kept saying that it had to be called because Kenny "launched" himself into the receiver. That was false. Kenny had his feet on the ground when he initiated contact. Kenny didn't come close to "going Superman" on that hit. Amazing how stupid the TV announcers can be at times.
It wasn't targeting. I could understand why the call was made when it happened, but with the aide of replay, how does he get tossed?
I have attached the definition of targeting, and launching yourself would not be considered targeting unless one of two things happend:
1) Helmet to helmet contact.
2) Crown of the helmet makes first contact.
Based on the replay, neither happend.
http://www.afca.com/article/article.php?id=2342
1) Helmet to helmet contact.
2) Crown of the helmet makes first contact.
Based on the replay, neither happend.
http://www.afca.com/article/article.php?id=2342
Hands clearly made contact first, he was in mid run. There was no way that he could have "launched himself at that receiver." Not Key's fault that the receiver tried to turn into him. Not either of their faults that helmets collided after the initial contact. Its bound to happen.
People complaining about the announcers are complete idiots. It was on the PAC 12 network was it not??
Guess people forgot how much of homers our MWC channel was. Lmao you people make me laugh
But no that was not targeting
Guess people forgot how much of homers our MWC channel was. Lmao you people make me laugh
But no that was not targeting
Close call, his helmet did hit the opponents face mask, on the road, calls like that are expected. if we were at home, its a no call
This is one of those weird situations. Do I believe it was targeting? no.
However since there was helmet to helmet contact, I think it is a tough call to overturn with replay.
That being said I think they should be able to appeal the suspension to get Keys available for the entire game on Saturday.
I'm with Joe (the other thread) and don't like the rule. I think there should be some degree of obvious intent. Most often the receiver duck their head to brace for impact when the defender is going for a perfect form tackle to the torso.
This case and the UT case from the other thread, there was no true "Targeting" to the head. Head contact was incidental or because the offensive player ducked.
However since there was helmet to helmet contact, I think it is a tough call to overturn with replay.
That being said I think they should be able to appeal the suspension to get Keys available for the entire game on Saturday.
I'm with Joe (the other thread) and don't like the rule. I think there should be some degree of obvious intent. Most often the receiver duck their head to brace for impact when the defender is going for a perfect form tackle to the torso.
This case and the UT case from the other thread, there was no true "Targeting" to the head. Head contact was incidental or because the offensive player ducked.
Exactly. Yes there was some helmet to helmet contact, but it was after the initial shoulder contact. I just don't know how a defender is supposed to stop that from happening in real time.
If somebody is roaming and headhunting, like a Jack Tatum (though I loved that dude), there's no room for it in the game. It's too dangerous, receivers are too vulnerable.
Intent can be difficult to judge, but sometimes it's crystal clear.
Many times, receivers tuck their heads before a hit and the target of chest 0.5 seconds ago is now a head. It's not reasonable to expect a defender to respond accordingly, IMO.
Unless from Pop Warner through college, kids are taught to hit the waist and below only, it's going to continue to be an issue.
Officials are going to error on the side of caution in these situations. I would hope with the luxury of replay they would get the call right though.
It is what it is. My point is in line with Bull that they with err on the side of caution. Since there was helmet contact overturning it would be difficult. However, I think there is enough video evidence to show that it was a hit that did not deserve an ejection and eligibility can be restored for the next game.
A little misleading, FWIW. The side of Keys' helmet hit the front of the UCLA receiver's facemask. It was not a vicious hit. It was hardly a hit at all. Keys moreso ran into the guy, but once there was contact, feet left the floor and it looked worse than it was.
Similar threads
