So it was upheld on the replay. On the radio, the guys all said it was targeting, but expressed misgivings about the rule itself. On TV, they weren't so sure.
Watching it in real time and again on replay, the QB clearly went down at the last second, exposing his head. There was no question he hit his head, but he didn't target his head.
Does him leaving his feet have anything to do with the rule?
This penalty needs to go. One of the problems is because this is all on the defense. Offensive player drops down, then it's still the defensive players fault. RB barrels ahead helmet down and there is contact, again it will be called on the defense. Either the offense shares in this rule or it should be eliminated.
Does J. Evans have to sit out the Tulsa game?
It seems like I remember that last year if the player was ejected then he had to sit out the next game, or maybe that was if the targeting penalty was in the 2nd half, he had to sit out the 1st half of the next game. I don't really know.
That is my understanding, the first half of the next game.Originally Posted by aurorasooner
The referee to the media said Evans didn't try to wrap his arms around him, was in the process of leaving his feet and lowered his head. Textbook definition of targeting. Unfortunately. The good news for OUr side is since it was in the first half, Evans won't have to miss the first half of the Tulsa game (unlike what those dippy announcers said on the electric teevee machine).
aurora, As far as I know, if the player is penalized for targeting in the first half, he's gone from the rest of that game. If the targeting takes place either after halftime or in an overtime situation, he's also gone from the first half of the following game. You have it right. Happy to have Evans for the next contest.
Boomer
Unfortunately, the right call was made on that play. It sucked for Evans.
This rule is a long way from being being a "good" one. Last night was the perfect example of why. There was absolutely no way Evans could have known in that instant that the Sokol was going to slide. Evans was attacking from inside the line, and Sokol decided not to slide until very, very late. Evans committed to the tackle at the same time Sokol committed to the slide, it was very clear there was no targeting intent, however, the rule doesn't make an exception for that.
What sucks is that there is very little Evans could have done different. What also sucks is that there's no 'good' way to coach for that rule in that instance. You can't tell defenders to hesitate and make sure the QB isn't going to slide. You coach defenders to attack the ball carrier, which is exactly what Evans did.
The rule needs to be addressed again. Automatic ejection needs to be removed from the rule. Allow the head official to make that decision based on the actual play.
It was targeting per the rule but I think if it happens in the first half then you should only be suspended the rest of that game... Not the next half of a game too
"If you're going to be at Oklahoma, you need to win, you need to contribute, you need to do all the little things to make this team succeed.'" T-Lew
Thanks for the explanations, everybody. Much appreciated
As usual, 8time nailed it. Only thing I would add is, we need to stop letting the media dictate the game.
Like I said elsewhere, the rule is bs. But in this day and age we should just be thankful the sport still exists. It probably won't in another 25 years.
I hope that you are wrong, but, I think it is needed to try to protect
these kids....
Don't be fooled - the rule is to protect the game more than the players. But if it does help a few kids, that will be a good side effect.
If it isn't there will be an MMA version. Put up a fence, only football rules apply. Not 5th grade politically correct rules.
" Ok children put your hands on your heart... and face Norman."
I saw a lot of targeting last season that was overturned and shouldn't have been.
5-0
BOY HOWDY !!!!
I just don't think a bad rule protects anyone. If anything it encourages offensive players to get into helmet contact situations to pick up a free 15 yards. It doesn't really encourage defenders to avoid headshots either since they can hardly predict exactly where a head is going to end up. Right now the rule seems to be "if it 'looks bad', it's a flag, if not, then it isn't."
Exactly. Exacctttlllyyyy. Rule is ridiculous. You are spot on with the offensive players abusing the rule. It's a lot easier to abuse that as an offense player, than to be a defensive player who's main concern is get the ball carrier down as soon as possible. When you are going to make a defensive stop you aren't thinking about hmm where is my helmet gonna end up??
That's also the reason that I don't think offensive players are going to abuse the rule. They are typically bang-bang type plays and so the offensive player doesn't have much more time to consider it than the defensive player in those situations. Plus, I think few offensive players are going to think "I'm gonna stick my head out there for someone to smack so we can get another 15 yards". Most players are concerned enough already about getting injured to intentionally put themselves in that position.
You are probably right about the offensive player not abusing the rule, although I do remember Colt McCoy being able to put his pinky toe on the sideline and draw a 15 yard late hit penalty at will.
"You get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right."---Penn Jillette
"It's what I do, I drink and I know things."---Tyrion Lannister
I was watching the Louisville/Miami game, and it looked like Miami should have been called on several plays. It just depends who the refs are. I guess we will never again see a "Superman" play like Roy Williams had on Sims again!
Posting Permissions
