If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Helmet to Helmet
17,934 Views |
167 Replies |
Last: 7 days ago by AWP 97
That was the poster play for targetting. If they don't call that play then get rid of the rule. The fool literally knocked himself out. The indescriminent calling of this penalty and the outsized impact of the calls and noncalls including into the next games needs to be investigated.
RARay said:Eliminatus said:
It was neither leading nor launching. You need one of those.
Sorry, yall. Not targeting. Just a bad bang bang play.
You don't need those when the player is defenseless. Forcible contact to head or neck is the standard.
I don't recall it being defenseless. But I didn't record it and can't play it back now unfortunately.
Eliminatus said:RARay said:Eliminatus said:
It was neither leading nor launching. You need one of those.
Sorry, yall. Not targeting. Just a bad bang bang play.
You don't need those when the player is defenseless. Forcible contact to head or neck is the standard.
I don't recall it being defenseless. But I didn't record it and can't play it back now unfortunately.
By definition, a receiver catching a pass is defenseless.
Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Eliminatus said:RARay said:Eliminatus said:
It was neither leading nor launching. You need one of those.
Sorry, yall. Not targeting. Just a bad bang bang play.
You don't need those when the player is defenseless. Forcible contact to head or neck is the standard.
I don't recall it being defenseless. But I didn't record it and can't play it back now unfortunately.
He was in the process of trying to catch the ball, that defines him as defenseless. You don't need replay. Owens likely catches that for the TD if he doesn't get murdered in the head.
I see this as another complete failure by Elko to not even get onto the refs about it. Who cares if the dude was in the ground he should have been screaming at the refs to take a look at it.
But there was several missed calls by the refs like the late hit on KC out of bounds.
But there was several missed calls by the refs like the late hit on KC out of bounds.
When you have a blatant missed call that bad, you have to wonder about officiating bias and we must turn to AI or some sort vision monitoring for officiating.
Love all those screaming targeting. Guessing these are the same people that sat on their hands in ND game when our C tackled the DT.
Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Intent isnt in the rule. Stop posting because you don't understand the rule. You're just making stuff up.
You don't know wtf you are talking about. But since you didn't record it and didn't re-watch it, that apparently makes it ok.Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Intent had nothing to do with it.
riverrataggie said:
How was it not reviewed from the booth? Text book targeting.
The unwritten rule is that if you knock yourself out it can't be targeting
What a clown rule
Take care of business on the field and you don't have to worry about this shiz.
Agryan00 said:
Love all those screaming targeting. Guessing these are the same people that sat on their hands in ND game when our C tackled the DT.
Well for one, holding isn't reviewable and targeting is in place to protect all players and IS reviewable. The complete rejection of reviewing was BS.
bslater07 said:Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Intent isnt in the rule. Stop posting because you don't understand the rule. You're just making stuff up.
Oh hush.
Straight from the official rulebook. I use the word "intent" because it is used in common parlance by every rules expert and commentator.
Quote:
Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a 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 forcible contact in the head or neck area
- A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
- Leading with 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
Every single one of those is intentional. Ya know, with intent. It's what separates it from bang bang plays.
Eliminatus said:bslater07 said:Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
Intent isnt in the rule. Stop posting because you don't understand the rule. You're just making stuff up.
Oh hush.
Straight from the official rulebook. I use the word "intent" because it is used in common parlance by every rules expert and commentator.Quote:
Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a 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 forcible contact in the head or neck area
- A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
- Leading with 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
Every single one of those is intentional. Ya know, with intent. It's what separates it from bang bang plays.
Take a really good look at the third & fourth bullets.
Reed would have thrown a pick anyways.
If we're two yards closer, he doesn't throw.
Take a suuuuper good look at the very first sentence of the note
Eliminatus said:
Take a suuuuper good look at the very first sentence of the note
Knocking himself out seems a bit excessive.
Texas fans would have thrown crap all over the field and got the call reversed. You all know it, and the fact that Ags didn't do it may have cost us the game. Live with it.
TexasRebel said:
If we're two yards closer, he doesn't throw.
Concepcion going out at the 4 is completely fine, but man, in hindsight of course, fighting for the plane I think he had a chance. Maybe.
Eliminatus said:Mathguy64 said:
If you concuss yourself it's helmet to helmet contact.
Yes, and targeting is intent and officiated as such.
Look, yall. I hate the zebras as much as anyone but I say what I see. I'll wait for replays to get posted and may retract but from the one game play slow mo I did not see it.
But based on your comments you definitely don't know the rules around targeting so best just to keep quiet.
Slyfox07 said:riverrataggie said:
How was it not reviewed from the booth? Text book targeting.
The unwritten rule is that if you knock yourself out it can't be targeting
What a clown rule
Agreed. I've seen it called still in NFL but yeah in college if the defender goes down hard it's always negated it seems like. No matter what.
Needed the clock. He was going downfield as best he could, but had to aim for the corner.
Big 12 refs. Nuff said.
Gig Em and God Bless America!
National Champions in Football 1939.
SEC Proud!
National Champions in Football 1939.
SEC Proud!
If you violate both, they cancel each other out, no penalty.
Who has video?
aTm '99
Angry Jonathan Zaludek
Joined:
May 25, 2009
Posts:
8,513
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agryan00 said:
Love all those screaming targeting. Guessing these are the same people that sat on their hands in ND game when our C tackled the DT.
No disrespect intended, but in general you t-shirt sip fans have a tremendously low intelligence on football rules and regulations. Truly a fanbase with very little understanding of the game, nor any real desire to actually learn the fundamentals.
AlaskanAg99 said:
Who has video?
Can someone please explain how this isn’t helmet to helmet/targeting in the A&M v Miami game? No flag? How? pic.twitter.com/yztCWi0MsG
— TheTruth (@TheTruth9313) December 20, 2025
My apologies yall. He was defenseless
Mohamed Toure put his life on the line to help win the game for Miami pic.twitter.com/emj2pNESiG
— NFL Draft Files (@NFL_DF) December 20, 2025
AlaskanAg99 said:
Who has video?
Ah, I see hedge beat me. The replay during the game showed it from the other side and that's where I didn't see any of the launching stuff but I thought we had made the catch and turned and took at least a step making him not defenseless. Which he absolutely is and clear as day here.
I retract my previous assertions of no targeting, all. This is definitely a hit to the head of a defenseless player in the midst of attempting a catch.
Mea culpa.
Onionman
Joined:
Nov 10, 2013
Posts:
9,443
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Featured Stories
See All
More improvement is A&M's goal in Monday's non-conference finale
by Olin Buchanan
Scouting Report: Texas A&M vs. Prairie View A&M
by Tom Schuberth
Ten season-defining moments along Texas A&M's championship run
by Richard Zane
5:44
4d ago
4.6k
The Film Room: Miami 10, Texas A&M 3
by Stephen McGee
6:00
5d ago
5.3k
Defense in Review feat. Sean Porter: Miami 10, Texas A&M 3
by Billy Liucci
LOYAL AG
For those wondering why coaches use deep drop zones so often late in games…
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
13
AozorAg
For those wondering why coaches use deep drop zones so often late in games…
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
10
Fireman
Left Field Opinion…Two Bowls should hold spots for First Round Losers
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6