1.Making “forcible contact against an opponent with the helmet crown,” or the top of the tackler’s head.
Making “forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent.”
For a play to be targeting, it also has to have at least one “indicator.”
1.Launching, or “leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area”
A crouch and upward thrust to make head or neck contact, even if the hitter still has feet on the ground
Leading with the “helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area”
“Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet”
As long as the tackler leads with his head, it doesn’t matter whether the opponent was defenseless or not. I thought it was pretty clear that the Ole Miss tackler launched head first and BTW hit Kelley in the head.
Exactly. Clear targeting. The analyst botched the interpretation of the rule, badly. Under his interpretation, if you’re a runner, as long as you aren’t defenseless, the tackler can launch, load and lead with the crown of the helmet.
He was wrong, but he’s a TV analyst so people accept it as gospel.
Being a Hog fan, sometimes, it is hard to admit what we don’t want to hear. We got a huge break on the PI NO CALL and it was “confirmed”; not “stands” on the fumble. Replay showed an elbow & a knee down on the ground with possession…regardless of a second, millisecond, minute, - once contact is made with the ground, PLAY OVER!
The ball is in player possession when a player has the ball firmly in his grasp by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds.
I don’t believe the replay could confirm that possession was ever established. Cupping the ball with one hand against your wrist as you are flying through the air is not firmly in the grasp. It looked like the ball was moving to me as he was in the air. That’s a play that needs to be looked at in real time, not frame by frame, because that was a liberal interpretation of “firmly in the grasp”. The analyst claiming that it would have been considered a catch by a receiver was preposterous. In common practice in those hot-potato situations possession requires you to be able to maintain ball security after hitting the ground unless possession had been firmly established beforehand. Neither was even close to being true.