Penalty for Targeting in high school

[ATLCat]

So I am going to go off on a tangent here and rant.

 

I HATE THE TARGETING RULE AS IT STANDS ON ALL LEVELS!

 

Now, first understand, I completely agree that these helmet to helmet hits have to end and when a player intentionally tries to injure a defenseless player they should be punished and suspended. That part I have no issue with whatsoever.

 

My issue is with the penalty being called and suspension enforced on plays where the Defender is simply trying to make a play and contact occurs as a result of a moving target or a bang bang play on the sideline where the Offensive player is searching for extra yardage.

 

Even more I hate the fact that is an all or nothing penalty. Either it is targeting, 15 yards, and ejection or it is no call whatsoever.

 

For College and Pro, where a replay system is in place, I think it should be handled more like the flagrant foul ruling in basketball.

 

Option 1, there is no targeting, it is a clean and legal hit with no intent to injure.

 

Option 2, there is excessive contact to a defenseless player or incidental helmet to helmet contact, but no intent to injure... the penalty is 15 yards and an automatic First Down for unnecessary roughness.

 

Option 3, there is clear targeting with intent to injure or reckless regard for personal safety. This is a 15 yard penalty for targeting and automatic First Down with an ejection.

 

 

Since High School does not have a replay system and no way to counter balance an official's judgment call, I believer "targeting" should ONLY be called when it is very clear that the intent is to injure a defenseless player. If it is helmet to helmet in the course of a live play it should not be flagged for targeting but instead for a personal foul.

 

The other twist I would have on all levels is once a player has one penalty for unnecessary roughness, ANY personal foul on that player in addition becomes grounds for ejection. Late Hit, Roughing the QB, Facemask, etc

[Bandit29]

That's very understandable! So what if it's in front of the ball? Like there is a guy behind you that jus intercepted the ball and now you are gonna go block for him. The play would be live per say and the guy is jus standing there "defenseless" taking a play off and you decide to block him by laying him out bc that was the first person that you saw in front of you.

 

Could be considered targeting, in fact plays like this is when it needs to be called. In this play you described it would be because you decide to block him by "laying him out", why not just block him?

[BigRedDiesel]

Yea I know, it’s a contact sport and they wear pads for a reason blah blah blah, but targeting should not be a part of high school football and has to go. I could spend an hour on Hudl and easily find you two dozen plays, especially on kickoffs and punts, where a player 'picks out' or targets an opponent and cleans them up when they are looking the other direction. Most of these are never flagged and they don't draw ejections.

 

This may sound silly, but I see as much 'targeting' on extra points/PATs as I do anywhere else. Rarely does a Friday night go by, that I don’t see a defensive player position himself at the back of the end zone and then run full speed and crash into an offensive lineman who has been told to stand there and take it or face up-downs at practice on Monday. These human torpedoes aren't trying to make a play on the ball or block a kick, they are just taking advantage of an opportunity to get a free hit on a player from another team that just scored on them. If it's all about safety and unnecessary hits, why not do something about these cheap shots?

[BigTiger55]

Could be considered targeting, in fact plays like this is when it needs to be called. In this play you described it would be because you decide to block him by "laying him out", why not just block him?

This is football! Intimidation is part of the game. Every player is trying to "lay out" the next. Big hits are part the game and explosive players can deliver them with ease. Maybe I'm old school but I was always taught not to let up that I was helping someone understand that this sport wasn't for them...As far as the targeting I don't like it because it's to vague and perception is a slippery slope. Especially if it's deemed beyond the field of play. I see a play and I say good job that player could have affected the outcome...the official sees the same play as unnecessary...

[Clyde]

 

Now that our expertise is well established, my question to Clyde and others with striped experience.....As an official, Is it hard to distinguish between what I saw and what I think I saw or thought I was going to see? Personally was the worst basketball official ever (gave it up after one varsity season) because I never was sure I was making the correct distinction.

 

It takes practice , patience, and constant reminders to not call something too quickly. You'll see it in basketball. A kid will score under the basket on a contested shot and the official will raise his hand with the fist closed to signal a foul and then drop it. He anticipated contact and then realized he didn't see it. We all do it. Saw it last night. Same in baseball with safe/out calls.

 

I kicked a call last night in a game where a throw-in for hit off of the backboard. My brain tried to quickly process what happened and I blew my whistle to signal OOB. As soon as I did the rest of my brain said it was still live as the angle the ball took could only signify it hit off of the bottom of the board and not the back. It happens. You just try to minimize how often it happens.