The CardBoard
Targeting.... - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Targeting.... (/thread-12717.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Re: Targeting.... - 82 Card - 09-28-2016

I wonder if these fools are confused by the fact that "crown" is used in the rule to mean something different from what it means in anatomy. In anatomy, the "crown" is not the top of the head, it is further back. The rule clearly is not using the term in the same sense.

Re: Targeting.... - Mick - 09-29-2016

I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

Re: Targeting.... - Mick - 09-29-2016

I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

Re: Targeting.... - Mick - 09-29-2016

I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 11:16 PM)82 Card link Wrote:... I seem to recall the TV announcers at one point saying that the officials had ruled that the hit was made with the face mask. They probably heard "front of helmet" and instinctively used what they believed was the more commonly used term for the same thing.

The announcers said that Goodman "hit him in the face mask", meaning that Goodman's helmet hit Owusu's facemask. The announcers made no statement to the effect that Goodman used his own face mask.

All the official said (as we went over a couple of days ago) was that "there was no targeting with the crown of the helmet".


Quote:The league apparently refuses to address their non-standard interpretation of "crown."

Well, the league hasn't quite said whether they officially agree with the ruling or not. If you look at the form letter that several people seem to now be receiving in response, it says,
"the Replay Official determined that the contact was made with the front and not the crown of the helmet ".
At no point does the letter say "the Pac-12 agrees that this call was made correctly" or anything to that effect.

I am quite sure that this response was carefully crafted, thus I don't think it was an accident of casual writing that the letter implies agreement with the officials without actually stating such agreement. 

Since part of the point of the letter is practiced ambiguity, of course they are not going to discuss the definition of the crown of the helmet. Or course that discussion would also run into the difficult fact that there is no definition of crown.

Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 11:16 PM)82 Card link Wrote:... I seem to recall the TV announcers at one point saying that the officials had ruled that the hit was made with the face mask. They probably heard "front of helmet" and instinctively used what they believed was the more commonly used term for the same thing.

The announcers said that Goodman "hit him in the face mask", meaning that Goodman's helmet hit Owusu's facemask. The announcers made no statement to the effect that Goodman used his own face mask.

All the official said (as we went over a couple of days ago) was that "there was no targeting with the crown of the helmet".


Quote:The league apparently refuses to address their non-standard interpretation of "crown."

Well, the league hasn't quite said whether they officially agree with the ruling or not. If you look at the form letter that several people seem to now be receiving in response, it says,
"the Replay Official determined that the contact was made with the front and not the crown of the helmet ".
At no point does the letter say "the Pac-12 agrees that this call was made correctly" or anything to that effect.

I am quite sure that this response was carefully crafted, thus I don't think it was an accident of casual writing that the letter implies agreement with the officials without actually stating such agreement. 

Since part of the point of the letter is practiced ambiguity, of course they are not going to discuss the definition of the crown of the helmet. Or course that discussion would also run into the difficult fact that there is no definition of crown.

Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 11:16 PM)82 Card link Wrote:... I seem to recall the TV announcers at one point saying that the officials had ruled that the hit was made with the face mask. They probably heard "front of helmet" and instinctively used what they believed was the more commonly used term for the same thing.

The announcers said that Goodman "hit him in the face mask", meaning that Goodman's helmet hit Owusu's facemask. The announcers made no statement to the effect that Goodman used his own face mask.

All the official said (as we went over a couple of days ago) was that "there was no targeting with the crown of the helmet".


Quote:The league apparently refuses to address their non-standard interpretation of "crown."

Well, the league hasn't quite said whether they officially agree with the ruling or not. If you look at the form letter that several people seem to now be receiving in response, it says,
"the Replay Official determined that the contact was made with the front and not the crown of the helmet ".
At no point does the letter say "the Pac-12 agrees that this call was made correctly" or anything to that effect.

I am quite sure that this response was carefully crafted, thus I don't think it was an accident of casual writing that the letter implies agreement with the officials without actually stating such agreement. 

Since part of the point of the letter is practiced ambiguity, of course they are not going to discuss the definition of the crown of the helmet. Or course that discussion would also run into the difficult fact that there is no definition of crown.

Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 05:51 AM)Mick link Wrote:I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

The NCAA rule (quoted earlier in this thread by MT) only specifies hitting with the crown of the helmet as illegal in this situation, and only defines it as the "top portion" of the helmet.

On the other hand, for me these days, the "hairline" part of the helmet and "crown" are pretty much the same thing ... perhaps even by the anatomical definition.
[Image: headanatomy.gif]


Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 05:51 AM)Mick link Wrote:I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

The NCAA rule (quoted earlier in this thread by MT) only specifies hitting with the crown of the helmet as illegal in this situation, and only defines it as the "top portion" of the helmet.

On the other hand, for me these days, the "hairline" part of the helmet and "crown" are pretty much the same thing ... perhaps even by the anatomical definition.
[Image: headanatomy.gif]


Re: Targeting.... - CTcard - 09-29-2016

(09-29-2016, 05:51 AM)Mick link Wrote:I always thought that the "crown" of one's head meant that part which would be covered by a literal crown.  Which would include that portion of the UCLA player's helmet that connected with Owusu.

Here's the NFL rule, Article 8 (g) which separately identifies the "crown" and "hairline" portions of the helmet.  Each are equally illegal:

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to: (g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

The NCAA rule (quoted earlier in this thread by MT) only specifies hitting with the crown of the helmet as illegal in this situation, and only defines it as the "top portion" of the helmet.

On the other hand, for me these days, the "hairline" part of the helmet and "crown" are pretty much the same thing ... perhaps even by the anatomical definition.
[Image: headanatomy.gif]


Re: Targeting.... - 2006alum - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 08:41 PM)martyup link Wrote:This Goodman thug regularly comes flying in head first, aiming his head at the opponent's head.  He usually turns his body so that impact is made with the top side of his helmet.  He doesn't even try to use his arms to make a tackle.  He is a headhunter, pure and simple.  If the officials don't stop him, he is going to seriously hurt himself or another player.
+1000. This needs to stop.

Re: Targeting.... - 2006alum - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 08:41 PM)martyup link Wrote:This Goodman thug regularly comes flying in head first, aiming his head at the opponent's head.  He usually turns his body so that impact is made with the top side of his helmet.  He doesn't even try to use his arms to make a tackle.  He is a headhunter, pure and simple.  If the officials don't stop him, he is going to seriously hurt himself or another player.
+1000. This needs to stop.

Re: Targeting.... - 2006alum - 09-29-2016

(09-28-2016, 08:41 PM)martyup link Wrote:This Goodman thug regularly comes flying in head first, aiming his head at the opponent's head.  He usually turns his body so that impact is made with the top side of his helmet.  He doesn't even try to use his arms to make a tackle.  He is a headhunter, pure and simple.  If the officials don't stop him, he is going to seriously hurt himself or another player.
+1000. This needs to stop.

Same song, second verse - M T - 10-01-2016

A small tip of the cap to UCLA --  Goodman appears to not be playing defense, but #21 is in for the special teams. (Update: he does play on the defense at 1:15 of the 2nd quarter.  The second half is yet to come.)

BUT, he is playing true to form.  In the 2nd quarter at 10:37, it appears he launches & blindsides a man running down from the kicking team with a blow with the NCAA-confirmed crown of his helmet to the target's helmet.  The ball at the time was bouncing on the ground and was subsequently downed.

Quote:Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
Examples (Rule 2-27-14):     
A player who receives a blind-side block.



Same song, second verse - M T - 10-01-2016

A small tip of the cap to UCLA --  Goodman appears to not be playing defense, but #21 is in for the special teams. (Update: he does play on the defense at 1:15 of the 2nd quarter.  The second half is yet to come.)

BUT, he is playing true to form.  In the 2nd quarter at 10:37, it appears he launches & blindsides a man running down from the kicking team with a blow with the NCAA-confirmed crown of his helmet to the target's helmet.  The ball at the time was bouncing on the ground and was subsequently downed.

Quote:Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
Examples (Rule 2-27-14):     
A player who receives a blind-side block.



Re: Targeting.... - yvonne - 10-01-2016

(09-27-2016, 09:29 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:I once had Larry Scott's email address, but apparently lost it.  Anyone have it? 

Try lscott@pac-12.org. That's the general format. You will probably get a canned response from a PR guy, however.

Re: Targeting.... - yvonne - 10-01-2016

(09-27-2016, 09:29 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:I once had Larry Scott's email address, but apparently lost it.  Anyone have it? 

Try lscott@pac-12.org. That's the general format. You will probably get a canned response from a PR guy, however.