RULES
Targeting and Initiating Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)
No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.
Targeting and Initiating Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4)
No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)
Note: Beginning in 2013, ejection from the game is a part of the penalty for violation of both Rule 9-1-3 and Rule 9-1-4.
KEY ELEMENTS
Target—to take aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with an apparent intent that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball.
Crown of the Helmet—the top portion of the helmet.
Contact to the head or neck area—not only with the helmet, but also with the forearm, fist, elbow, or shoulder—these can all lead to a foul.
Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
I understand the move to limit the potential for head trauma in football. I understand the ejection of dipshits like Brandon Merriweather and Andre Waters, long before him, that target the head of opponents for their own twisted jollies. The above rule is meant to rid the game of, or at least punish, these dipshits. Unfortunately, it's not working out that way. Every ejection that I've seen due to this rule has been for a hit that's incidental rather than egregious, let alone intentional That's not doing the game any favors. Actually, it's hurting the game.
The first time that I ever saw this rule in action was in 2013, the first year that violation of the rule brought an ejection, when Cal defensive end Chris McCain was ejected for what looked more like a textbook tackle than targeting. He hit the Northwestern quarterback in the chest. The top of his helmet might have grazed the bottom of the face mask. That's it and he was gone for the game. Ridiculous.
After that start to the new enforcement of the rule I really needed an example of a reason for it's existence. I've yet to see one.
In the years since there's been a bunch as ridiculous as the first.
This bowl season has been hurt by at least three ejections that hurt the quality of the games.
In the Foster Farms Bowl Nebraska, safety Nate Gerry was tossed for tackling, not targeting, UCLA running back Paul Perkins. There was absolutely nothing there. Nothing to warrant a penalty. Certainly nothing to warrant ejection. If anything the helmet contact was caused by Perkins dipping his head.
In the Armed Forces Bowl, Air Force safety Weston Steelhammer's season ended way on his team's third defensive play when he was ejected for striking Cal receiver Bryce Treggs in the helmet. Now, this call might have been closer to the type of hit that the rule is attempting to prevent. It was helmet-to-helmet but it was clearly incidental. Without falling to the ground in a fetal position there's no way for Steelhammer could have avoided the contact that was inevitable. This play warranted a flag by the letter of the rule. An ejection? I just don't see how a player can be removed from a college football game for playing football.
This from the player that was supposedly targeted:
"I'm not a huge fan of the targeting rule," Treggs said. "Because it's not like he was literally aiming for my head."
It might not be the best time to mention it but Steelhammer has to be one of the greatest football names. Ever.
The ridiculous rule had a greater profile in yesterday's Fiesta Bowl. Ohio St. defensive end Joey Bosa is one of the best college football players in the nation. He probably didn't play long enough to break a sweat. He was tossed early for hitting Notre Dame quarterback DeShone Kizer in the chest with his helmet. The chest! This his was much like McCain's in 2013. Like that hit, Bosa's helmet might have grazed the face mask of Kizer.
The most ridiculous thing with this rule is that the hits have to be confirmed on replay before the offending player is ejected. Even if the action happens too fast live the officials have to see that these hits aren't targeting on all forms of replays. Of the four examples mentioned here, Steelhammer's hit on Treggs is the only one that's helmet-to-helmet. It's the only one, in my opinion, that warranted a personal foul penalty but there was no reason for Steelhammer to be ejected. The contact was incidental. at best.
In the three years since ejection's have been a part of the punishment for hits somehow deemed targeting I've yet to see a supposedly targeted player injured. Probably because these offensive hits have been more tackle than target. A more offensive hit in the Fiesta Bowl than Bosa's hit was the post-play shove that ended the day of Notre Dame linebacker Jaylon Smith. The shove from Ohio St. lineman Taylor Decker was beyond the play on the field and caused Smith to suffer what's being called a "significant knee injury." An injury that might hurt Smith a lot now and might hurt him even more when it's draft time this spring. The targeting ejections are meant to punish players, and teams, for endangering the short-term and long-term health of their peers on the football field. It wasn't meant to toss college football players for playing football. McCain and Bosa were tossed for hitting opponents in the chest. I still have no idea why Gerry was tossed.
The current enforcement of the rule isn't making the game safer. It's making it worse. It feels more like a p.r. move than an attempt to make the game better. Just let the kids play.
No comments:
Post a Comment