FanPost

Best Seat in The House: Hit the Target

"Crap, I killed him." - Matt Cashore-USA TODAY Sports

[Ed. Note: This article was written before Saturday's game, in which Max Redfield was ejected on a targeting call. Video of this incident has been added to the end of the article.]

Greetings again, fellow OFD-generates to another installment of Best Seat in the House! I’m really excited about this week because ever since I had the idea to begin this series, my main idea was to find situations that happened in Irish games that caused some level of consternation. Last year against Sparty was really the origination of this sentiment and I’ve always wanted to be able to assist my fellow Commentariat members with the correct rule-based opinions on questionable calls and non-calls.

This week, we sure had a doozy. Not only were 80% of us completely hammered during the festivities of the game but we also had two great plays that caused everyone a fair amount of angst and reaction. The latter of which is quickly becoming an NDFB meme, #Rememberthe6. MoTS has even gone so far with this that he has even threatened a banhammer should anyone in the future dare to insinuate that the final score of the "Closeout Game" be anything other than the appropriate 37-0. Will I get this entire thread removed under that new law? Do I have any form of diplomatic immunity in this matter? Will the messenger be executed in short order? I suppose you’d better just READ ON!

300px-gameofthrones_alton_20120411_01_medium

I am probably jumping the gun a little bit on this thread because I know that if I were to wait an additional week or so when Rogers Redding puts together the first weekly training video on the College Football Officials website, one or both of these situations may find their way onto it. I am willing to take the risk and hope that the good doctor sees these plays the way I do and I will not have to eat crow after the official ruling comes out. The first play comes from the 1Q of the game and led to Andrew Trumbetti being taken off the field for a few series to either check for concussion symptoms or possibly to administer an IV of pain medication for the massive headache he likely sustained. Jchrapek, I’ll need your expert opinion on the proper treatment for a bruised ego.

The rules cover targeting(and all other personal and unsportsmanlike fouls) in rule 9. Specifically we want to take a look at 9-1-4 and more specifically the section called "Note 1." Here is the text:

"Targeting means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with an apparent intent that goes beyond making a legal tackle or legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

· Launch – a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make contact in the head or neck area

· A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make contact in the head or neck area even though one or both feet are still on the ground

· Leading with the helmet, forearm, fist, hand, or elbow to attack with contact at the head or neck area

· Lowering the head before attacking by initiating contact with the crown of the helmet

After reading this, can you see the category I want to place this in? I actually have two, so if you guessed one of these you get full credit: Launch AND Leading with the helmet. I think it is clear from this angle that this is the case:

Khalid Hill(80) should have been ejected for targeting on this call and I have a feeling the observer of this game will rank the calling official down for missing this. Pretty blatant, IMO.

That brings us to….

What do we call here? Well, we cant trust any of the guiding principles in the note above but remember the sentence before the note mentions that the bulleted items are not the ONLY way targeting can be called. For the full explanation of what targeting IS, we have to read all of rule 9-1-4:

"No player shall target and MAKE FORCIBLE CONTACT with the head or neck area of a DEFENSELESS OPPONENT with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow, or shoulder."

The enforcement is below this, but I don’t want to bore you reading it…Clif Notes version: 15 yard foul, Automatic 1st, player is ejected for the game and if it happens in the 2nd half, he is out the 1st half of the next game. Subject to replay.

I added some bolded text there because that was a rule change for this season. Remember last year where so often we had to watch replay over and over again and the replay officials were having to determine whether the first contact was made to the chest or if he just barely grazed a shoulder pad before hitting the head? That is gone this year. It doesn’t matter if the contact started at the head, the determining factor is was FORCIBLE contact made? Also, to have TARGETING as opposed to unnecessary roughness, you have to target a DEFENSELESS PLAYER. Who are defenseless players? Note 2 under 9-1-4 answers that:

· A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass

· A receiver attempting to catch a pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier

· A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return

· A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick

· A player on the ground

· A player obviously out of the play

· A player who receives a blind-side block

· A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped

· A QUARTERBACK AT ANYTIME AFTER A CHANGE OF POSSESSION

Airplane-sweat_medium

Oh geeze, I’m starting to see MoTS get up from his chair, I don’t like this…

OK so my defense here is going to be to call on OTHER officials to back me up on this one. There is a great officiating web forum that has many NCAA and NFL officials and I posted both of these clips and asked the community what they would call. It really was quite interesting the range of opinions I got. The first one that I received changed my original opinion. When I saw this happen, I was in full fan mode and I was right along with the rest of the Irish Nation. "How the hell can you call that?" But then I remembered that a QB is protected all the way through the play.

And then as more responses came in, I began to further refine my opinion. I have now settled on this conclusion: This is a missed call and the TD should have stood OR This is the correct call because this is clearly not targeting(you can see Redfield hit him in the shoulder with his arms). So yeah, I’m wishy washy. Basically I can see why this would be called on the field but if it had been let go, I think would have been ok too.

Ok, MoTS can you loosen the rack just a little? I SAID you were right! Go on, keep claiming 37-0, you’re not wrong! PLEASE! NO…NO DON’T TURN THE LIGHTS OUT AND LEAVE ME HERE!!! Darn you!!

UPDATE: Here is the targeting call that got Max Redfield ejected from Saturday night's game:

Ok guys…see y’all next time!

FanPosts are primarily for readers of One Foot Down to share and express information and commentary. The content provided doesn't always reflect the voice or collective thought of One Foot Down.