Question: Targeting non-call (#6 hit on Norwood-video attached)

Al A Bama · Nov 10, 2013

Bad Pony said:
I hope you share my hate for the way they apply it and not what they are trying to protect. Too many athletes lately (Mark Duper and Tony Dorsett) are testing positive for CTE. With what we know/are finding out about repetitive head trauma it is making me err on the side of caution.

RTR

You can't hit high (concussions, then CTE); and you can't hit low (future walking cane or wheel chair). Where can you hit? If you hit in the middle of a person's body, then they'll all be wearing flack jackets like QB's. I've got a feeling it's going to be flag football or two hand followed by one hand touch. If women participate there will be personal fouls for touching certain places.

ChattTide · Nov 10, 2013

My one thought was "Who has been torching LSU for the past 3 years and will they try to take him out of the game?" before the game started. When that play happened, I thought, "Yep. There it is." I was honestly surprised they didn't call it a targeting. You play a game with refs involved and you're going to get calls that go for you and against you.

My biggest thought was that the refs were not going to eject him because they didn't want that to be the deciding factor in the game. Didn't matter anyway. We marched right down and scored.

Roll Tide!!
ChattTide

CullmanTide · Nov 10, 2013

Shoeless said:
I don't think criticizing the rule indicates that anyone isn't concerned about player safety but this rule is only in its infancy and I have had enough of it. I don't have the answer but to throw a kid out of a big game when it is subjected to interpretation, field conditions, player position, etc, etc is an invitation for game changing mistakes.

Throw the flag and leave the player in the game. Second flag in the same game....OK maybe but I'm still not convinced. Some refs are overly trigger happy and it will never be consistent. I also think TV games will always get the shaft on this rule.

I guess sometimes people have to be hit in the head to be convinced. Maybe you have never been knocked unconscious, I have. It will change your perspective.

Toddrn · Nov 10, 2013

It looked like the official that threw the flag was talked out of calling it targeting. Once the flag is thrown the ref that made the call should get to decide if it was targeting and then let replay over turn the call if needed. RTR

Shoeless · Nov 10, 2013

CullmanTide said:
I guess sometimes people have to be hit in the head to be convinced. Maybe you have never been knocked unconscious, I have. It will change your perspective.

Blind assumptions can be strange and dangerous bed fellows. Knocked out twice, once was on the football practice field. The intent of the rule is good. It's the application and enforcement that is the problem.

CullmanTide · Nov 10, 2013

Shoeless said:
Blind assumptions can be strange and dangerous bed fellows. Knocked out twice, once was on the football practice field. The intent of the rule is good. It's the application and enforcement that is the problem.

This we can agree on but clearly this was a case it should have been applied. If not here they may as well scrap the rule altogether.

JBama_in_PCOLA · Nov 10, 2013

Boy he should have gotten called for that!

Sent from my iPhone

BradtheImpaler · Nov 10, 2013

So I guess the moral of the story is...

... wait 'til the player is down and then drive the crown of your helmet into his face. Then it's a late hit instead of targeting. Genius.

bamabryan · Nov 10, 2013

Shoeless said:
Blind assumptions can be strange and dangerous bed fellows. Knocked out twice, once was on the football practice field. The intent of the rule is good. It's the application and enforcement that is the problem.

I agree. I don't condone players head hunting on the field and leading with their head and taking shots at other players heads. I think if players are afraid to hit high then they are going hit low and we are going to see tons of knee injuries. What then? It's football. It's a game of controlled violence.
I've been knocked out twice on the football field. I went to the hospital and had one confirmed concussion. I suspect I had at least one, maybe two more concussions. It's a part of the game.

Ole Man Dan · Nov 10, 2013

TiderGreg said:
And it was overly flagrant, just like the face mask penalty soon after. Then the same player that should have been ejected on the Norwood hit shoves Fowler and they didn't call it.

Don't know if anyone else agree's but LSU showed the worst sportsmanship at the end of the game as a I can remember against a rival. And Les Miles should have yanked the culprits, they were playing thug Defense on that late drive and I am thankful that our players showed good character in not biting the bait. Norwood, Fowler and AJ all had cause to react but did they correct thing. I applaud our players for their sportsmanship against a morally lost team imo. Not one player greeted Mettenberger after he walk off the field like a man after 4 sacks. Not even the top level coaches. The Saban magic all gone from LSU.

I was taught that 'CLASS SHOWS'... (So does 'NO CLASS')

Ole Man Dan · Nov 10, 2013

CullmanTide said:
I guess sometimes people have to be hit in the head to be convinced. Maybe you have never been knocked unconscious, I have. It will change your perspective.

Yeah, I've been there too. Three times. :conf2:
The joke was that our High school Coaches always held up two fingers.
Everyone replied correctly and went back into the games.
(Kids can be pretty dumb, when they are trying for 'Macho'...)

NBF_Bama_Cavalry · Nov 11, 2013

Whether one agrees with the rule or not, it's still the rule. Early in the season Clinton-Dix and Eddie Jackson were flagged for targeting and initially ejected from the game. Replay proved conclusively that it was not targeting and they were allowed to remain in the game. If the rule indicates that if there's a question, the official should call targeting and allow the replay booth to make the determination, that's what should have been called. 100 replays would not have overturned Loston's ejection had it been properly flagged. JMO & RTR!

1Dawn · Nov 11, 2013

My whole family was calling targeting on the play last night (well, all the men anyway). What I did not understand was why McCarron was patting the LSU player who made the bad play on his helmet and laughing. I didn't see any need for that really.

Kevo · Nov 11, 2013

1Dawn said:
My whole family was calling targeting on the play last night (well, all the men anyway). What I did not understand was why McCarron was patting the LSU player who made the bad play on his helmet and laughing. I didn't see any need for that really.

I don't know what was going through A.J.'s head, but my guess is something like this: First, A.J. is a classy guy and probably doesn't have any ill will towards the player. AJ is just out there to win the game. The guy was probably legitimately not trying to hit him how he did, and expressed as much to AJ. AJ probably said something like, "no hard feelings, hope you don't get ejected."

afadam07 · Nov 11, 2013

tattooguy21 said:
So i keep hearing and reading about these targeting calls that are wrong, and how the penalty yards still stand after the penalty is reversed. But how was this not targeting?

Helmet to helmet INITIAL contact on a "defenseless" player who wasn't looking at blocker?
Could the seasoned, and rational fans of this great sport please educate me? Thanks.

Based on my understanding of the rule, this was not a targeting foul because he met all of the criteria for the penalty itself. Now, for instance, if said defender would have tried to intercept the ball and not intentionally run into the receiver (e.g. Clinton-Dix), then the said defender would have received a targeting foul that would later be overturned by replay officials, however, the penalty yards would remain.

Again, this is only based off of what I have noticed this year

CrimsonProf · Nov 11, 2013

NBF_Bama_Cavalry said:
Whether one agrees with the rule or not, it's still the rule. Early in the season Clinton-Dix and Eddie Jackson were flagged for targeting and initially ejected from the game. Replay proved conclusively that it was not targeting and they were allowed to remain in the game. If the rule indicates that if there's a question, the official should call targeting and allow the replay booth to make the determination, that's what should have been called. 100 replays would not have overturned Loston's ejection had it been properly flagged. JMO & RTR!

Exactly right. Beyond the fact that the rule is on the books, there have been numerous players in this conference who have been ejected for less than that. The rules have to be uniform this year - we can sort out the mess in the offseason.

Special K · Nov 11, 2013

They blew the call and this was a textbook case of targeting. But put the targeting rule aside for the moment. This was so blatant and flagrant, in my opinion he should have been ejected under the old rules. And then we get this gem from Jarvis Landry after the game (speaking on the officiating):

It was kind of sad and made me kind of mad looking at it from the sideline. There were a lot of calls toward Alabama's favor that were kind of questionable and kept their drives alive.

Typical loser mentality - get your rear end handed to you and blame someone else.

pigsinspace · Nov 11, 2013

I remember at least one player(from Ole Miss, I think) was suspended after a helmet to helmet hit last year, so hopefully somebody will make this guy spend the next game in street clothes.

JBama_in_PCOLA · Nov 11, 2013

Special K said:
They blew the call and this was a textbook case of targeting. But put the targeting rule aside for the moment. This was so blatant and flagrant, in my opinion he should have been ejected under the old rules. And then we get this gem from Jarvis Landry after the game (speaking on the officiating):

Typical loser mentality - get your rear end handed to you and blame someone else.

Which game was he looking at?! AU/UT?!

Sent from my iPhone

day-day · Nov 11, 2013

Ref's blew the call in several ways. Norwood was not down at the time of the hit so it should not have been ruled a late hit. I think the ref's were looking for a way not to call targeting maybe due to the "bad press" that has come from the way the new rule has been enforced this season. It definitely looks like the LSU defender led with the helmet because he ducked his head instead of keeping it up and also didn't turn his shoulder causing helmet-to-helmet.

Is there a rule called "unnecessary roughness" that can be applied in the NCAA?

Question: Targeting non-call (#6 hit on Norwood-video attached)

Hall of Fame

All-SEC

Hall of Fame

All-American

Scout Team

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

All-American

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

All-American

1st Team

BamaNation Citizen

1st Team

Hall of Fame

All-American

1st Team

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!