Targeting rule in HS... bogus or benefit?

[panfan]

I'm concerned that this extremely subjective penalty is excessive. Ejection from game and suspended from play through first half of the next game. Any 3A players been subjected to this rule yet, and if so, was the enforcement of the penalty justified? Hell, why dont' we just loose the freakin pads and play rugby...

[Rabid Cougar]

I'm concerned that this extremely subjective penalty is excessive. Ejection from game and suspended from play through first half of the next game. Any 3A players been subjected to this rule yet, and if so, was the enforcement of the penalty justified? Hell, why dont' we just loose the freakin pads and play rugby...

It has to be very blatant for officials to call it. It is a Player Safety call. If there is doubt, it will for sure be a personal foul. There is no carry over to the next game in UIL games.
You will know it when you see it. Our Chapter has made one call with ejection so far this season(1A). We reviewed it (game film from coach) at our weekly meeting and it was a very easy call to be made.

[Bullaholic]

I'm concerned that this extremely subjective penalty is excessive. Ejection from game and suspended from play through first half of the next game. Any 3A players been subjected to this rule yet, and if so, was the enforcement of the penalty justified? Hell, why dont' we just loose the freakin pads and play rugby...

I hear ya, panfan. The only way I could go along with this rule is if they apply the same standard for overturning a call with replay---there has to be indisputable evidence in the official's mind that targeting and/or inflicting injury was intended---not just incidental contact while attempting a tackle.

[Rabid Cougar]

I hear ya, panfan. The only way I could go along with this rule is if they apply the same standard for overturning a call with replay---there has to be indisputable evidence in the official's mind that targeting and/or inflicting injury was intended---not just incidental contact while attempting a tackle.

The calls that have been used as examples were hits on QBs after the ball was gone and blind side blocks on KO/Punt/INT returns, hits on WRs across the middle RBs thatare held up and polished off by another defensive player. Those are example of the the Unprotected Player" part of the rule. Bear in mind, the hits have to be to the head and neck area delivered by any part of the defenders body. Also the action that is commonly known as "Spearing" with the crown of the helmet to any part of the body.

The days of the "ear hole shots" are over.

[YTBulldogs]

Hell, why dont' we just loose the freakin pads and play rugby...

Bet these parents of this kid would agree with ya panfan.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_24183897/after-player-dies-from-hit-high-school-cancels?source=rss

[panfan]

The calls that have been used as examples were hits on QBs after the ball was gone and blind side blocks on KO/Punt/INT returns, hits on WRs across the middle RBs thatare held up and polished off by another defensive player. Those are example of the the Unprotected Player" part of the rule. Bear in mind, the hits have to be to the head and neck area delivered by any part of the defenders body. Also the action that is commonly known as "Spearing" with the crown of the helmet to any part of the body.

The days of the "ear hole shots" are over.

Cougar - can you post the specific language of the rule?

[Rabid Cougar]

Cougar - can you post the specific language of the rule?
Sorry, my rule book is at the house.

The language of the rule has not changed from past years, the addition is the ejection part.

[YTBulldogs]

Sorry, my rule book is at the house.

The language of the rule has not changed from past years, the addition is the ejection part.

And, the UIL exception was added, that does not carry over the ejection to the next game for Texas HS games.

[panfan]

And, the UIL exception was added, that does not carry over the ejection to the next game for Texas HS games.

Thanks YT and Cougar on rules clarification.

[YTBulldogs]

panfan, I know several fans has a copy of the rule book, but--don't know the UIL exceptions we must follow in Texas as officials. Here they are: Print these out, and keep with rule book.

http://www.uiltexas.org/files/athletics/FB_UIL_Exceptions_2012-13.pdf

[GrTigers6]

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. (Rule 9-6.)
9-1-4

No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6).
UIL Exceptions:
9-6-2

When there is a foul called for initiating contact/targeting an opponent (Rules 9-1-3 and 9-1-4) that does not result in a player disqualification, there shall automatically be a video review by the conference for possible additional sanctions before the next scheduled game.
41. 9-2-1-b-2. No disqualified person shall be in view of the field of play (Rule 9-2-6).
EXCEPTION: 9-2-1-b-2. Does not apply to UIL games.
42. 9-2-2-d-PENALTY—Disqualification for the remainder of the game and the team’s next game [S27 and
S47]. Administer as a dead ball foul; penalty enforced at the succeeding spot, and Team B fouls do not require a
first down. Team timeout. VIOLATION—Rules 3-3-6 and 3-4-2-b [S23, S3 or S21]. If the disqualification occurs
during the last game of a season, players with eligibility remaining will serve the next-game disqualification
during the first game of the next season for which they are eligible.
EXCEPTION: 9-2-2-d-PENALTY. For UIL games, disqualification is for remainder of game only.
Local school districts and/or UIL District Committees may apply additional disciplinary action.
43. 9-2-6-b. A disqualified player must leave the playing enclosure within a reasonable amount of time after his
disqualification. He must remain out of view of the field of play under team supervision for the duration of the
game.
EXCEPTION: 9-2-6-b. Does not apply to UIL games.

[caleb_mccaig]

We'll be playing flag football before it's all said and done. I really don't think it's this generation that is in danger. It's that generation who played with barely any kind of a helmet who are realizing they can get some extra cash after they've gone bankrupt. Today's helmets are much safer and you even have seen players walk away from the game after a few concussions. They're being smart about it.

The targeting rule is B.S. It's only going to force players, like D.J. Swearinger said, to hit low and go for knees/legs because they're afraid of being fined or suspended for high school and college. How long until they say no low hits after a huge spike in torn knees?

This is only hurting the game and it's going to continue to happen, maybe not at the same rate, but it's something that will be impossible to eradicate from the game due to an offensive player lowering his head and making it impossible for a defensive player to adjust at full speed.

[GrTigers6]

We'll be playing flag football before it's all said and done. I really don't think it's this generation that is in danger. It's that generation who played with barely any kind of a helmet who are realizing they can get some extra cash after they've gone bankrupt. Today's helmets are much safer and you even have seen players walk away from the game after a few concussions. They're being smart about it.

The targeting rule is B.S. It's only going to force players, like D.J. Swearinger said, to hit low and go for knees/legs because they're afraid of being fined or suspended for high school and college. How long until they say no low hits after a huge spike in torn knees?

This is only hurting the game and it's going to continue to happen, maybe not at the same rate, but it's something that will be impossible to eradicate from the game due to an offensive player lowering his head and making it impossible for a defensive player to adjust at full speed.incidental contact is not a foul. just obvious intentional ones

[caleb_mccaig]

incidental contact is not a foul. just obvious intentional ones

How many times have you seen someone flagged for a WR putting their head down below the defenders shoulders? More often than not that's what is called.

I just dislike how we are taking away the big hit. It takes away from the mental aspect of the game. It used to be if you were a linebacker you wanted the WR to be scared to come across the middle. Now they know if they get lit up they're going to just get 15 yards. It used to be the QB/WR who were the ones negatively affected when he left his WR out to dry. Now, they benefit.

[panfan]

incidental contact is not a foul. just obvious intentional ones

I think there in lies the rub. Intent is impossible to define. The only intent that is clear is that the defensive player is trying to make a tackle. Any way you look at it its a judgement call and each ref is going to view it differently.

[YTBulldogs]

I just dislike how we are taking away the big hit.

Big hit's are still legal I believe.

[caleb_mccaig]

I think there in lies the rub. Intent is impossible to define. The only intent that is clear is that the defensive player is trying to make a tackle. Any way you look at it its a judgement call and each ref is going to view it differently.

Agreed.



4
Big hit's are still legal I believe.


Yes they are, but how confident do you think a kid is going to be when a WR comes across the middle knowing that a ref's judgment call is going to depend on whether he stops this third and ten or whether he gives them a first down and has to sit out the next game or be ejected.

[YTBulldogs]

Yes they are, but how confident do you think a kid is going to be when a WR comes across the middle knowing that a ref's judgment call is going to depend on whether he stops this third and ten or whether he gives them a first down and has to sit out the next game or be ejected.

I don't understand this reasoning. He isn't ejected for a hard hit. Could be if he was targeting a defenseless player, and/or hit above shoulders with his helmet. If you don't think there is issue's from helmet to helmet contact in regards to head trauma, c-spine issues and even death---your wrong IMO. Brain studies have proven this to be a fact with over the years of repeated head blows, during all levels of football play, by the athlete. UIL/NCAA/Texas Coaches Assn is trying to change that pattern of long term lasting effects on their athletes. You are correct. It's not the game we grew up playing, and I'm so thankful now that I know the evidence of it's effects from repeated head blows. That's why some schools are teaching the "targeting the ball" tackling methods. Direct your contact point at the ball when you tackle. Not the head. Yes, it's no longer the game we knew, thank God.

[caleb_mccaig]

I don't understand this reasoning. He isn't ejected for a hard hit. Could be if he was targeting a defenseless player, and/or hit above shoulders with his helmet. If you don't think there is issue's from helmet to helmet contact in regards to head trauma, c-spine issues and even death---your wrong IMO. Brain studies have proven this to be a fact with over the years of repeated head blows, during all levels of football play, by the athlete. UIL/NCAA/Texas Coaches Assn is trying to change that pattern of long term lasting effects on their athletes. You are correct. It's not the game we grew up playing, and I'm so thankful now that I know the evidence of it's effects from repeated head blows. That's why some schools are teaching the "targeting the ball" tackling methods. Direct your contact point at the ball when you tackle. Not the head. Yes, it's no longer the game we knew, thank God.


I think it's reasonable because from watching hundreds of games since the helmet-to-helmet rules have been in effect over all three levels of play I've seen more flags thrown for hits that didn't deserve it than for those that did. Obviously there will be some that are worthy of a penalty. But also, we're leaving this up to a ref who is watching a FULL SPEED play to determine whether this kid led with his head and intentionally targeted another player without close-up HD replay that the NCAA and NFL have. I am aware of helmet-to-helmet contact affecting someone personally, I had seven concussions from 7th grade until I graduated high school.

[hollywood]

Revert back to leather helmets and this will go away! Lol

J/K

I will say that helmets in today's game are way more protective than they were 10 years ago and even 20 years ago when I played. Because they are so protective, kids feel they are invincible and lead with the head more often. It took just a handful of insane players that lead with the head back in the day. Now, more and more. Or it could be the era of Sportscenter highlights that have kids wanting to imitate what they see. :crazy:

Take the super helmet away and you'll see more form tackling... Instead of "I'm going to blow you up!" type of hit attempts.

[GrTigers6]

I think it's reasonable because from watching hundreds of games since the helmet-to-helmet rules have been in effect over all three levels of play I've seen more flags thrown for hits that didn't deserve it than for those that did. Obviously there will be some that are worthy of a penalty. But also, we're leaving this up to a ref who is watching a FULL SPEED play to determine whether this kid led with his head and intentionally targeted another player without close-up HD replay that the NCAA and NFL have. I am aware of helmet-to-helmet contact affecting someone personally, I had seven concussions from 7th grade until I graduated high school.What your missing Caleb is that you can have a helmet to helmet hit that is not "targeting" If you lead with your helmet and or initiate contact with the crown of the helmet it is targeting. If you are making a form tackle and hit the helmet it is not targeting, just a football play. there is a huge difference and in the years I have been calling games I have yet to even have a close call that I thought might be targeting. So Like it or not the enforcement is working and will save several kids the agony of head trauma in the future.

[caleb_mccaig]

What your missing Caleb is that you can have a helmet to helmet hit that is not "targeting" If you lead with your helmet and or initiate contact with the crown of the helmet it is targeting. If you are making a form tackle and hit the helmet it is not targeting, just a football play. there is a huge difference and in the years I have been calling games I have yet to even have a close call that I thought might be targeting. So Like it or not the enforcement is working and will save several kids the agony of head trauma in the future.

That is great to hear! Is there not a flag for helmet to helmet in high school? I know there is in NCAA and NFL that is separate from the targeting penalty.

[Rabid Cougar]

Revert back to leather helmets and this will go away! Lol

J/K

I will say that helmets in today's game are way more protective than they were 10 years ago and even 20 years ago when I played. Because they are so protective, kids feel they are invincible and lead with the head more often. It took just a handful of insane players that lead with the head back in the day. Now, more and more. Or it could be the era of Sportscenter highlights that have kids wanting to imitate what they see. :crazy:

Take the super helmet away and you'll see more form tackling... Instead of "I'm going to blow you up!" type of hit attempts.

It is not just helmet to helmet hits. It can be forearms and shoulders to the head. Quentin Coryatt's hit on the TCU receiver was with his shoulder pad and forearm to the face. The helmet was not in the equation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jza8J3Hi_Jo

[hollywood]

What your missing Caleb is that you can have a helmet to helmet hit that is not "targeting" If you lead with your helmet and or initiate contact with the crown of the helmet it is targeting. If you are making a form tackle and hit the helmet it is not targeting, just a football play. there is a huge difference and in the years I have been calling games I have yet to even have a close call that I thought might be targeting. So Like it or not the enforcement is working and will save several kids the agony of head trauma in the future.


I think it's reasonable because from watching hundreds of games since the helmet-to-helmet rules have been in effect over all three levels of play I've seen more flags thrown for hits that didn't deserve it than for those that did. Obviously there will be some that are worthy of a penalty. But also, we're leaving this up to a ref who is watching a FULL SPEED play to determine whether this kid led with his head and intentionally targeted another player without close-up HD replay that the NCAA and NFL have. I am aware of helmet-to-helmet contact affecting someone personally, I had seven concussions from 7th grade until I graduated high school.

Let's look at caleb's sig... there are 3 tacklers in the pic. These are all legal tackling plays. If any of the 3 kids were to have had the crown of their helmet (especially the tackler in the center) against the ball carrier's helmet, this would be an illegal tackle. Correct GrTigers6?

[Rabid Cougar]

That is great to hear! Is there not a flag for helmet to helmet in high school? I know there is in NCAA and NFL that is separate from the targeting penalty.

UIL uses NCAA with some exceptions. "Targeting" in Texas high school is the same as the NCAA. A helmet to helmet hit on a "defenseless player" is "Targeting" A helmet to helmet between ball carrier( RB) and a LB and neither ducts his head is called a "collision". If both make contact with the face mask and the front/brow of the helmet that is not targeting. A RB can be called for "targeting' if he leads with the crown of the helmet when he runs into a defender.

[GrTigers6]

It is not just helmet to helmet hits. It can be forearms and shoulders to the head. Quentin Coryatt's hit on the TCU receiver was with his shoulder pad and forearm to the face. The helmet was not in the equation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jza8J3Hi_JoThat play is the sole intent of the targeting rule. Not only did he hit him directly in the helmet he also threw a forearm. And on top of that he taunted while standing over a prone player. which is Unsportsmanlike conduct.
In answer to your question there is only the targeting foul when talking about the helmets. Helmets hit all the time but how you use your helmet that gets you in trouble. Texas high school uses ncaa rules with the few exceptions from UIL

[caleb_mccaig]

This is the stuff that I'm tired of seeing, every time you see a big hit a flag comes out. He leads with his shoulder (his helmet is to the right of the opponents), but because the helmet flew off and because it wasn't low (in the chest) they throw a flag. All he's trying to do is make play to stop Arkansas from scoring and it worked, until you guessed it. The automatic first down and fifteen yards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgudTReM5Kw

[Rabid Cougar]

This is the stuff that I'm tired of seeing, every time you see a big hit a flag comes out. He leads with his shoulder (his helmet is to the right of the opponents), but because the helmet flew off and because it wasn't low (in the chest) they throw a flag. All he's trying to do is make play to stop Arkansas from scoring and it worked, until you guessed it. The automatic first down and fifteen yards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgudTReM5Kw

Easy call. He launched himself at the head neck area of the reciever. Doesn't matter if he leads with his shoulder. Same rule is in place today. He would be ejected this season though. The operative words are "launched" and "head or neck area". Had he hit him in the mid-section, the WR just got blown up.

[caleb_mccaig]

Easy call. He launched himself at the head neck area of the reciever. Doesn't matter if he leads with his shoulder. Same rule is in place today. He would be ejected this season though. The operative words are "launched" and "head or neck area". Had he hit him in the mid-section, the WR just got blown up.

Oh ok, I thought it was only helmet to helmet contact, not just the targeting of those areas. This rule is going to be under the microscope and under scrutiny as long as it's in the rulebook. It will always be questioned by players on the defensive side of the ball and always praised by those on offense. Being primarily a defensive player my entire career you can see why I'm against this.

[TexMike]

Another myth, that it only affects the defense. Offensive players can be charged with targeting as well. That there are not as many flags seen against offensive players may be a testament ot the fact they are more intelligent for the most part and know how to play within the rules

[Old Tiger]

Another myth, that it only affects the defense. Offensive players can be charged with targeting as well. That there are not as many flags seen against offensive players may be a testament ot the fact they are more intelligent for the most part and know how to play within the rules
Yet you watch these college and NFL games where you see a runner outside the box and designated area completely lower their crown and not a single damn time I have seen it called.


My favorite part is in the college game where they review the play, realize it wasn't helmet to helmet after the review. When they choose to not eject the player it proves that there shouldn't have been a flag, yet still enforce a 15 yard penalty. IMO that needs to be revised.

[TexMike]

The deal with a runner is not a foul except for in the NFL

As for the yardage staying after IR review....refs have screamed about this since Feb when we first received the changes for this year. The stated reason for not allowing IR to remove the whole penalty is they do not want to open the door to IR reviewing every penalty. That will destroy the game. This was seen as a "middle ground". IR can overturn the ejection part only.

[YTBulldogs]

I also heard, if something wasn't done in regards to these injuries due to hitting in the head region, not instructing how to tackle properly without leading with the helmet any longer and where new contacts should be taught in new tackle drills, lawsuits would soon be coming and totally ruin the game at all levels. UIL/Coaches Assn/ISD's/NCAA/NFL had to do something to curve this. Least show they do not allow it, and has tougher rules against it in place or they'd be the deep pockets in these suits.

[TexMike]

The NCAA believes it is at a similar situation as football faced in Teddy Roosevelt's day. They deemed serious action was required to save the game and they took it. I am reminded of something I learned in HS, "Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it." http://www.history.com/news/how-teddy-roosevelt-saved-football

[Old Tiger]

The deal with a runner is not a foul except for in the NFL

As for the yardage staying after IR review....refs have screamed about this since Feb when we first received the changes for this year. The stated reason for not allowing IR to remove the whole penalty is they do not want to open the door to IR reviewing every penalty. That will destroy the game. This was seen as a "middle ground". IR can overturn the ejection part only.

The point is the offensive player never gets called for it regardless of classification.

The game is already being stopped to review for this, so how hard is it to waive a flag if the player did not lead with crown or violate any rule? Why penalize the defense for a good hit?

[Old Tiger]

The NCAA believes it is at a similar situation as football faced in Teddy Roosevelt's day. They deemed serious action was required to save the game and they took it. I am reminded of something I learned in HS, "Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it." http://www.history.com/news/how-teddy-roosevelt-saved-football

History repeats itself regardless of mans influence on it.

[YTBulldogs]

T
The game is already being stopped to review for this, so how hard is it to waive a flag if the player did not lead with crown or violate any rule? Why penalize the defense for a good hit?

Good point. Does seem odd.

[GrTigers6]

The point is the offensive player never gets called for it regardless of classification.

The game is already being stopped to review for this, so how hard is it to waive a flag if the player did not lead with crown or violate any rule? Why penalize the defense for a good hit?Actuall I have seen two times where it was called on an offensive player. For a blindside block both times where the player launched at the helmet of the defender. As far as a ball carrier being called it would be a little difficult for a ball carrier to launch at a defender while carrying the ball so that leaves leading with the crown of the helmet. And that would definitely have to be such an obvious intent for me to call it. Which if you do lead with the crown when running the ball then you kind of take some of the guess work out of the equation because the intent seems to be to hurt the defender.

[Old Tiger]

Actuall I have seen two times where it was called on an offensive player. For a blindside block both times where the player launched at the helmet of the defender. As far as a ball carrier being called it would be a little difficult for a ball carrier to launch at a defender while carrying the ball so that leaves leading with the crown of the helmet. And that would definitely have to be such an obvious intent for me to call it. Which if you do lead with the crown when running the ball then you kind of take some of the guess work out of the equation because the intent seems to be to hurt the defender.

Those have been flagged prior.


These are the hits that are supposed to be flagged in the NFL now on the offensive player in 2013.
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/764834/thumbs/o-TRENT-RICHARDSON-facebook.jpg

Yet I've seen at least a half dozen plus plays where the offensive player has done this in the current NFL season and a penalty has yet to be called.

[Old Tiger]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000247648/article/tennessee-titans-jackie-battle-fined-for-crownofthehelmet-hit


"Battle did not receive a penalty during the game. The violation was discovered during a league review."

[panfan]

Actuall I have seen two times where it was called on an offensive player. For a blindside block both times where the player launched at the helmet of the defender. As far as a ball carrier being called it would be a little difficult for a ball carrier to launch at a defender while carrying the ball so that leaves leading with the crown of the helmet. And that would definitely have to be such an obvious intent for me to call it. Which if you do lead with the crown when running the ball then you kind of take some of the guess work out of the equation because the intent seems to be to hurt the defender.

Almost every power running back out there lowers his head prior to impact, unless they are finess, juke and puke runners. Point is, its a one sided penalty. Call it what it is, a defensive penalty or enforce it both ways. The launching thing seems to be part of a further definition that goes towards flagrancy.

Again the rule states, "No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder."

Two things need defining here so they are absolutely clear, target and defenseless. Again, as it is written, the potential for a range of interpretations is huge. Sure the refs all go to umpire school and get shown a video of what it looks like, but in the heat of the momement, when you are calling the said penalty, what are you going to rely on, the video replay in your head of what it looks like, or the strict definition of the rule, and the instant reply in your mind of the play that just happened in front of you to make that decision.


More than likley its just like when I used to umpire a baseball game. Action occurs, rules interpretation, apply rule.

[GrTigers6]

Something to think about when you complain about taking these targeting hits out of the game.
http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/11- ... t-hit.html

[GrTigers6]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/11-year-old-football-player-suffers-spinal-fracture-after-helmet-to-helmet-hit.html

[panfan]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/11-year-old-football-player-suffers-spinal-fracture-after-helmet-to-helmet-hit.html

Tiger - we all saw this. And I feel for this kid and his family. But lets face it, this same kind of injury could have happened in any one of a number of different ways in a football related sense or even off the football field. I'm not complaining one bit about the rule, I would simply like it to be explicitly clear how it is applied, and to do that more precise language is required.

[GrTigers6]

Tiger - we all saw this. And I feel for this kid and his family. But lets face it, this same kind of injury could have happened in any one of a number of different ways in a football related sense or even off the football field. I'm not complaining one bit about the rule, I would simply like it to be explicitly clear how it is applied, and to do that more precise language is required.

Problem is panfan, No matter how clear it states it in the rules you are gonna have some officials who either don't care to learn or just flat don't get it and call it wrong anyway. That is the nature of this business unfortunately. Every chapter is mostly dedicated officials that care about the kids and learn the rules to be a better official but on the other hand there are officials who for what ever reason just want a paycheck and don't care to come to meetings or clinics. They just do what they did 20 years ago and the game has changed drastically.
I understand you wanting the rules more clear believe me. Blocking below the waist last year was mind numbing trying to figure out. Its easier this year but still is hard to officiate. there are a lot of rules that need to be clarified but for whatever reason they are not but I guarantee you that the rules committee has done anything they can to make it easier to call. The rules committee is made up of coaches and officials so they work together to make the rules easier to officiate and coach. But some rules aren't that simple.

[hollywood]

Stephenville has a new 5th and 6th grade tackle football league. Being a kid years ago, I would have loved this! But the more I see this happening, you have to ask... are young kids mature enough to be taught the tackling techniques and more importantly, are coaches educated or trained enough to do so? They do not have to have a license like in soccer. To be an upper level competitive soccer coach (contact sport but less than tackle football obviously), you have to complete a coaching course to receive a coaching license and required in most upper level leagues. Also, are young kids this age strong enough to take the blows to the body and stress the contact inforces on their bodies? Doesn't make since to me. Just that many more opportunities for blows to the head. Just seems the risk isn't worth the reward to me at that young of an age.

[panfan]

Problem is panfan, No matter how clear it states it in the rules you are gonna have some officials who either don't care to learn or just flat don't get it and call it wrong anyway. That is the nature of this business unfortunately. Every chapter is mostly dedicated officials that care about the kids and learn the rules to be a better official but on the other hand there are officials who for what ever reason just want a paycheck and don't care to come to meetings or clinics. They just do what they did 20 years ago and the game has changed drastically.
I understand you wanting the rules more clear believe me. Blocking below the waist last year was mind numbing trying to figure out. Its easier this year but still is hard to officiate. there are a lot of rules that need to be clarified but for whatever reason they are not but I guarantee you that the rules committee has done anything they can to make it easier to call. The rules committee is made up of coaches and officials so they work together to make the rules easier to officiate and coach. But some rules aren't that simple.

At least there are some good folks out there who are trying - sounds like you are one of them. If it leads to coaches instructing on better tackling technique, then I'm all for it.

[caleb_mccaig]

Obviously this is an issue. The penalties and the injuries are something that is very important to everyone and all levels have taken their stand on the defenseless player. So it's only a matter of time until people start tackling low. How many broken legs or torn up knees is it going to take to get this taken away from the defender also? This is what I'm worried about, the players are going to start tackling to where there is no way they can get flagged for maybe being somewhat close to the neck/head area. What happens then? Are they going to make a low tackle illegal also whenever knee/leg injuries spike?

[YTBulldogs]

Stephenville has a new 5th and 6th grade tackle football league. Being a kid years ago, I would have loved this! But the more I see this happening, you have to ask... are young kids mature enough to be taught the tackling techniques and more importantly, are coaches educated or trained enough to do so? They do not have to have a license like in soccer. To be an upper level competitive soccer coach (contact sport but less than tackle football obviously), you have to complete a coaching course to receive a coaching license and required in most upper level leagues. Also, are young kids this age strong enough to take the blows to the body and stress the contact inforces on their bodies? Doesn't make since to me. Just that many more opportunities for blows to the head. Just seems the risk isn't worth the reward to me at that young of an age.

I can see due to injury, these pop warner like leagues (least tackling) fading away by government. Especially, as you point out, the coaches don't know the proper way to tackle. Just what they were taught, and those days are gone from here on out.

[hollywood]

Obviously this is an issue. The penalties and the injuries are something that is very important to everyone and all levels have taken their stand on the defenseless player. So it's only a matter of time until people start tackling low. How many broken legs or torn up knees is it going to take to get this taken away from the defender also? This is what I'm worried about, the players are going to start tackling to where there is no way they can get flagged for maybe being somewhat close to the neck/head area. What happens then? Are they going to make a low tackle illegal also whenever knee/leg injuries spike?

I'm telling y'all... leather helmets will solve this! Or maybe kevlar in our modern sciences of today. Look at Rugby or Australian Rules Football.. would be interesting the head injuries by ratio in those sports vs American Football.

[YTBulldogs]

Obviously this is an issue. The penalties and the injuries are something that is very important to everyone and all levels have taken their stand on the defenseless player. So it's only a matter of time until people start tackling low. How many broken legs or torn up knees is it going to take to get this taken away from the defender also? This is what I'm worried about, the players are going to start tackling to where there is no way they can get flagged for maybe being somewhat close to the neck/head area. What happens then? Are they going to make a low tackle illegal also whenever knee/leg injuries spike?

Not sure too many have died from a broke leg while playing football.

[caleb_mccaig]

I'm telling y'all... leather helmets will solve this! Or maybe kevlar in our modern sciences of today. Look at Rugby or Australian Rules Football.. would be interesting the head injuries by ratio in those sports vs American Football.

Agreed! I want to see some statistics about people from the U.S. who have sued for post-concussion issues compared to those who have for these other sports. I'm sure it's not even close.

[caleb_mccaig]

Not sure too many have died from a broke leg while playing football.

All it takes is one broken femur cutting the femoral artery. I'm sure the percentage chances from death from a head injury and that aren't too far apart.

[YTBulldogs]

Agreed! I want to see some statistics about people from the U.S. who have sued for post-concussion issues compared to those who have for these other sports. I'm sure it's not even close.
Football has been warned, and those governing body's are pro-active to prevent any lawsuits. This is priority one on their agenda. Cause, if those lawsuits come, they will be massive and very expensive. Could end this game entirely. Serious stuff here. UIL/NCAA are covering their butt by these rules and advising all (coaches included), no more head contact allowed. Period. Trust me, no more hits like we seen in the past, will ever be back in our game. That's a good thing.

[YTBulldogs]

Why ya think the NFL settle so quick after getting proven results in on brain study's? They are the reason UIL/NCAA is so anal over these hits. The suits filter down.

[hollywood]

Agreed! I want to see some statistics about people from the U.S. who have sued for post-concussion issues compared to those who have for these other sports. I'm sure it's not even close.

What's ironic is the helmet designs have been pushed to be more protective (over engineered) to decrease the amount of head trauma and I believe it's caused other issues because they are so protected now, IMO. The technique of form tackling has gone to the way side for the most part.

Let's take a look at running shoe technologies for reference... up until the 80's, running shoes had minimal protection, cushion, and support. Some runners had some foot issues, or abnormal feet, minor aches and pains, etc. So then the running shoe company's thought... let's engineer shoes that have more cushion, specialized shoes for certain foot types that protect the feet more!!! That sounds like the answer. Wrong! It started heightening the injuries in other areas of the body... want to know why? Because the best running technique was compromised when the over engineered shoe became the "norm". Any Asics, Saucony, Brooks running shoe wearers out there? They were some of the first to start with the over cushioned models. (They all make minimal shoe designs now btw). Even Nike got into the fad, but were one of the first companies to offer a minimal running shoe of this era. Any Nike Free wearers? The running shoe "experts" thought if they add more cushion, offer more protection, the foot issues will decrease or even disappear. Because of the super cushioned running shoes, runners were extending to far outward striking the ground with the heel which was causing more shock and compression to the joints and the entire skeletal structure. Remember hearing from your track coach or friend... heel/toe heel/toe heel/toe? Wrong! More protection of the foot actually weakens the muscles, joints and tendons studies have shown. The foot strike is meant to land just under the body with the forefoot striking the ground first. This technique acts as a natural shock absorber.

So think about helmet technology... sometimes you have to go back to the basic more simplistic designs that were meant to be for the answer while reverting back to proper techniques. BTW, I run a lot of miles and have reverted back to < = >... LESS IS MORE. I had all kinds of issues with more cushioned shoes. I haven't had a running injury in over 4 years. That's over 4,000 miles of running on these legs and feet with no injuries. Just sayin'!!

[caleb_mccaig]

"This is a tough game. This is a game for grown men. When we signed up for that, we all know that. If you don't want to play football, you don't want to be physical, you don't want to be hit, don't come around guys that like to hit. That's the game of football, just do it the right way."

Donte Hitner, previously Whitner, but changed his name to Hitner this past week to protest the league's mandate in "the right way".

Been one of my favorite players in the league for awhile now. Glad to see he's standing up for what many defensive players agree with.

[YTBulldogs]

"This is a tough game. This is a game for grown men. When we signed up for that, we all know that. If you don't want to play football, you don't want to be physical, you don't want to be hit, don't come around guys that like to hit. That's the game of football, just do it the right way."

Donte Hitner, previously Whitner, but changed his name to Hitner this past week to protest the league's mandate in "the right way".

Been one of my favorite players in the league for awhile now. Glad to see he's standing up for what many defensive players agree with.

Yeah, he's pretty good. But, he'll never beat the system here. Even if he changed his name to Donte Obama:)

[caleb_mccaig]

Yeah, he's pretty good. But, he'll never beat the system here. Even if he changed his name to Donte Obama:)

hahah to be honest he'll probably just get fined more.

[TexMike]

n The rules committee is made up of coaches and officials so they work together to make the rules easier to officiate and coach. But some rules aren't that simple.

Actually this is one of the problems, there are no officials on the committee. Although Rogers Redding is there he is just the Rules Editor and does not even get to vote on things

[Old Tiger]

Concussions will never go away from the game regardless of the helmet technology.

[GrTigers6]

Actually this is one of the problems, there are no officials on the committee. Although Rogers Redding is there he is just the Rules Editor and does not even get to vote on things

Well I guess I was misinformed! :doh:

[panfan]

Well I guess I was misinformed! :doh:

Well Thanks Texmike - so I'm back to my original statement - define the terms of the rule and clarify it so it is clear. Sure there will always be interpretation, but there is a way to write the rule such that interpreation is limited.

[hollywood]

Concussions will never go away from the game regardless of the helmet technology.

I agree... but I guarantee you if you took some of that padding away... no one would lead with the crown. Have you put on a modern helmet? Thinks feel like a Tempurpedic mattress around your head. Too much!

[panfan]

I agree... but I guarantee you if you took some of that padding away... no one would lead with the crown. Have you put on a modern helmet? Thinks feel like a Tempurpedic mattress around your head. Too much!

Haven't tried on a modern helmet, but I do recall the old helmets with foam padding that was hard as a rock. Had my bell rung more than a few times. break out the ammonia capsule! sniff snif, yeah I'm ok coach, go back in.

[GrTigers6]

Interesting article from both sides of the issue of targeting
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9754906/targeting-rule-continues-frustrate-coaches-players-college-football

[Deuce]

Stephenville has a new 5th and 6th grade tackle football league. Being a kid years ago, I would have loved this! But the more I see this happening, you have to ask... are young kids mature enough to be taught the tackling techniques and more importantly, are coaches educated or trained enough to do so? They do not have to have a license like in soccer. To be an upper level competitive soccer coach (contact sport but less than tackle football obviously), you have to complete a coaching course to receive a coaching license and required in most upper level leagues. Also, are young kids this age strong enough to take the blows to the body and stress the contact inforces on their bodies? Doesn't make since to me. Just that many more opportunities for blows to the head. Just seems the risk isn't worth the reward to me at that young of an age.

Graham has a 5th & 6th grade league. A 5th grader on my sons team got a concussion just last weekend from a hit, and he is a big kid.

[Ville]

Aledo starts very young and you can tell by the time they hit 7th grade. I thought it was 3rd grade but looking online it may be first grade.

[hollywood]

Aledo starts very young and you can tell by the time they hit 7th grade. I thought it was 3rd grade but looking online it may be first grade.

I'm know it helps the kids get reps and experience at full speed contact... my thoughts are broader, what are the effects going to be later in life... say ages 40 and beyond. This isn't directed towards you Ville, but I'm just concerned what the effects could be on a child that encounters concussions at a young age. Wonder if there has been any studies on this concerning long term effects on kids that played peewee football. At the young ages of 8, 9, 10, and 11 year olds, the brain, joints, muscles are still developing in a way that are sensitive to blows to the head and body. Don't get me wrong, I love football and sports in general, but I just don't see the long term benefit of starting full contact football at that young of an age. Seems like maybe a few parents living through their kids a bit or trying to gain an edge for their kids when they do hit the pads in Jr High. Are the rewards worth the risk? Russian roulette or crap shoot whether these youngsters encounter an injury that could affect their Jr High or High School career or more importantly later in life. I may sound gloom and doom on this subject but I see young children at this crucial development age being compromised of their health. We often here "It's about the kids"... in this case, is it really?

[Ville]

I'm know it helps the kids get reps and experience at full speed contact... my thoughts are broader, what are the effects going to be later in life... say ages 40 and beyond. This isn't directed towards you Ville, but I'm just concerned what the effects could be on a child that encounters concussions at a young age. Wonder if there has been any studies on this concerning long term effects on kids that played peewee football. At the young ages of 8, 9, 10, and 11 year olds, the brain, joints, muscles are still developing in a way that are sensitive to blows to the head and body. Don't get me wrong, I love football and sports in general, but I just don't see the long term benefit of starting full contact football at that young of an age. Seems like maybe a few parents living through their kids a bit or trying to gain an edge for their kids when they do hit the pads in Jr High. Are the rewards worth the risk? Russian roulette or crap shoot whether these youngsters encounter an injury that could affect their Jr High or High School career or more importantly later in life. I may sound gloom and doom on this subject but I see young children at this crucial development age being compromised of their health. We often here "It's about the kids"... in this case, is it really?

I don't know about the studies that have or will be done. And there are options for flag football if one decides that is the way they want to go. Parents have to make the decision and it's a choice you have to make as a dad or mom. There will be injuries regardless of the age. I don't know if the force and game speed that age is enough to cause a serious chance for head injuries more than any other level. I would assume if it were to dangerous it wouldn't be allowed and is strictly monitored. With that being said It's a tough call to make because all kids are different.
Kids may want to play and be aggressive and can somewhat understand how to protect themselves with good coaching. I think that's the key is having it be closely monitored and let people know there may be risk upfront. If your child is timid And frail it might not be the best idea for him. If he isn't and loves football and you trust the coaches then I say go for it. Being aware is the biggest part and not pushing a kid who isn't ready is obviously the wrong choice. I would like to hear from some of the parent who's kids did play say in the Aledo league on what they saw and how they feel. It's not new and has been going on for a good while. My guess is they would say you see the same injuries at all levels or maybe a little less when they are very young in the short term.
One last thing I will say is that the coaches should have to be qualified and teach the game the safest way possible. And to teach and correct things they see kids doing wrong to make it as safe as possible. I noticed on the Aledo web site it mentions the coaches being very qualified and seems to be very successful for the kids at all ages. And yes it does give them a head start in learning for sure.

[YTBulldogs]

I don't know about the studies that have or will be done. And there are options for flag football if one decides that is the way they want to go. Parents have to make the decision and it's a choice you have to make as a dad or mom. There will be injuries regardless of the age. I don't know if the force and game speed that age is enough to cause a serious chance for head injuries more than any other level. I would assume if it were to dangerous it wouldn't be allowed and is strictly monitored. With that being said It's a tough call to make because all kids are different.
Kids may want to play and be aggressive and can somewhat understand how to protect themselves with good coaching. I think that's the key is having it be closely monitored and let people know there may be risk upfront. If your child is timid And frail it might not be the best idea for him. If he isn't and loves football and you trust the coaches then I say go for it. Being aware is the biggest part and not pushing a kid who isn't ready is obviously the wrong choice. I would like to hear from some of the parent who's kids did play say in the Aledo league on what they saw and how they feel. It's not new and has been going on for a good while. My guess is they would say you see the same injuries at all levels or maybe a little less when they are very young in the short term.
One last thing I will say is that the coaches should have to be qualified and teach the game the safest way possible. And to teach and correct things they see kids doing wrong to make it as safe as possible. I noticed on the Aledo web site it mentions the coaches being very qualified and seems to be very successful for the kids at all ages. And yes it does give them a head start in learning for sure.

:iagree: The change needed must come from the coaching first. PeeWee league, JH and HS levels. Good post here.

[defense51]

There's alot of good points brought up here, concussions will always be a part of contact sports as will knee, ankle, shoulder, etc... This rule is a start at reducing some of the concussions, head and neck injuries involved with football. As Ville stated above, the coaching of young players is going to be a key factor from this point forward. Learning a new rule and proper tackling is much easier than breaking a young player's bad habits learned from improper techniques or poor coaching. The youth football leagues may very well have to conduct coaching schools or have some sort of qualifying criteria to be a coach in the league. Education of players, coaches, and parents will go along way to keep the refs from having to make a split second decision on this rule. If it's enforced and interpreted correctly, then the helmet-to-helmet rule is good for football and especially the kids playing.

[Old Tiger]

There's alot of good points brought up here, concussions will always be a part of contact sports as will knee, ankle, shoulder, etc... This rule is a start at reducing some of the concussions, head and neck injuries involved with football. As Ville stated above, the coaching of young players is going to be a key factor from this point forward. Learning a new rule and proper tackling is much easier than breaking a young player's bad habits learned from improper techniques or poor coaching. The youth football leagues may very well have to conduct coaching schools or have some sort of qualifying criteria to be a coach in the league. Education of players, coaches, and parents will go along way to keep the refs from having to make a split second decision on this rule. If it's enforced and interpreted correctly, then the helmet-to-helmet rule is good for football and especially the kids playing.
Sad part is even the good fundamental hits are being called for targeting or etc. So there is where confusion on the defenders side comes from. These penalties are all subjective to the refs and its a shame.

[panfan]

Sad part is even the good fundamental hits are being called for targeting or etc. So there is where confusion on the defenders side comes from. These penalties are all subjective to the refs and its a shame.

Throughout the weekend of football watching, everyone take their shot at what looks to be a targeting foul. How many do you get vs what is called. Add em up and share on monday. Is what you consider targeting more or less what officials call. Remember it's an offensive and defensive foul.

[Old Tiger]

Throughout the weekend of football watching, everyone take their shot at what looks to be a targeting foul. How many do you get vs what is called. Add em up and share on monday. Is what you consider targeting more or less what officials call. Remember it's an offensive and defensive foul.

College is the easiest place to look for your scenario because if they call targeting it is reviewed. 7 times this season it has been reviewed and found not to be targeting, yet still a 15 yard penalty was still assessed on the defense.

[defense51]

Sad part is even the good fundamental hits are being called for targeting or etc. So there is where confusion on the defenders side comes from. These penalties are all subjective to the refs and its a shame.

I agree OT, I've seen several called for what I thought was just a damn good legal hit, I've also seen a couple that I thought should have been flagged until I saw the replay. It always seems new rules are called excessively for the first couple of seasons after it's implemented. Maybe it's the refs erring on the side of caution, interpretation is easy in slow motion replay, not so much at full speed. I haven't seen any called at the high school level yet, how many here on the 3ADL have seen a call in their games?

[panfan]

College is the easiest place to look for your scenario because if they call targeting it is reviewed. 7 times this season it has been reviewed and found not to be targeting, yet still a 15 yard penalty was still assessed on the defense.

Targeting called and upheld against an offensive tackle making a block on a defensive guy going for the quarterback. Quite frankly, this did not look like targeting to me, but just a solid block. More importantly -how did defenseless player role into application of this rule. To me, a guy got the piss knocked out of him, ref thought I need to throw a flag but wha will I call? I know targeting. Can anyone fine a clip of this and post it? Sorry - it was late in the Baylor WV game last night.

[Old Tiger]

Targeting called and upheld against an offensive tackle making a block on a defensive guy going for the quarterback. Quite frankly, this did not look like targeting to me, but just a solid block. More importantly -how did defenseless player role into applicaiton of this rule. To me, a guy got the piss knocked out of him, ref thought I need to throw a flag but wha will I call? I know targeting. Can anyone fine a clip of this and post it?
In the Baylor game? Guy peeled back and led with his crown to the defender head.

[panfan]

In the Baylor game? Guy peeled back and led with his crown to the defender head.

The rule states against a defenseless player. How was mongo 300 lbs defender going for QB defenseless?

[Old Tiger]

The rule states against a defenseless player. How was mongo 300 lbs defender going for QB defenseless?

Ball was already thrown and defender was pulling up to stop on the play. At least that is what I saw.