Are "Targeting" and "Helmet-to-Helmet" different calls/rules or are both just covered under "Unsportsmanlike Conduct"?
Targeting versus Helmet-to-Helmet
- Thread starter VaPrepsRod
- Start date
Neither are unsportsmanlike conduct. Targeting and illegal helmet contact (helmet-to-helmet is just one type of illegal helmet contact) are personal fouls.
The difference is that a USC is always non-contact in high school; two USC calls results in ejection.They are penalized from the succeeding spot.
Personal fouls are old fashioned contact fouls that are penalized under live ball principals,
Targeting is a seperate type of personal foul with its own definition (2-20-2) "ART. 2 . . . Targeting is an act by any player who takes aim and initiates contact against an opponent above the shoulders with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulders."
Helmet-to-helmet is not specifically defined but would fall under the definition of targeting. a blow by the head, to the head that is an intentional act.
Helmets bang together all the time in ways that are not intentional and they are not personal fouls.
The difference is that a USC is always non-contact in high school; two USC calls results in ejection.They are penalized from the succeeding spot.
Personal fouls are old fashioned contact fouls that are penalized under live ball principals,
Targeting is a seperate type of personal foul with its own definition (2-20-2) "ART. 2 . . . Targeting is an act by any player who takes aim and initiates contact against an opponent above the shoulders with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulders."
Helmet-to-helmet is not specifically defined but would fall under the definition of targeting. a blow by the head, to the head that is an intentional act.
Helmets bang together all the time in ways that are not intentional and they are not personal fouls.
There's lots of confusion about helmet to helmet, targeting and defenseless players situations. White hat will agree with me that there's a lot of disagreement on these types of plays, even among officials.
Helmet to helmet contact on a defenseless player is illegal but is not necessarily targeting. For example, a QB who has thrown a pass is considered a defenseless play. Even if a hit on him is otherwise legal, helmet to helmet contact would result in roughing the passer. But it would not be targeting if it does not meet the definition WH posted above.
Helmet to helmet contact on a defenseless player is illegal but is not necessarily targeting. For example, a QB who has thrown a pass is considered a defenseless play. Even if a hit on him is otherwise legal, helmet to helmet contact would result in roughing the passer. But it would not be targeting if it does not meet the definition WH posted above.
Very true. As I said, helmet-to-helmet is part of illegal helmet contact. In this case, it's roughing the passer. It might be targeting. it might not. It might be spearing. It might not. Since targeting at the high school level does not include an automatic ejection, the words we use are not as important as they are in NCAA where targeting means an ejection.
FBRef is correct that there is rarely concensus among officials, so consistency is very hard to come by. Ther are sites where guys from all over the country can look at film and comment. There wll be plays where half the comments say targeting and half say it isn't. There are some that are nearly unanimous verdicts from the film, but were called differently in real time at game speed. It's a very hard call to make.
I've had one targeting call this year and it was on a kickoff return, not a play from scrimmage. Even that was hard to see on the video. When it happened, I had a flag on a member of the kicking team. Another member of the kicking team asked "That was targeting, wasn't it?" Before I said anything one of his teammates said "Obviously." then he yelled at the guy who made the hit something about "Play smarter than that." The guy who was flagged got up, smacked his own head, then held out his hand to the ball carrier and said something that I took as an apology because they dapped hands. I thought the video would show it clear as day, but it didn't. On video, it was hard to tell if they even touched. Funny how that works.
FBRef is correct that there is rarely concensus among officials, so consistency is very hard to come by. Ther are sites where guys from all over the country can look at film and comment. There wll be plays where half the comments say targeting and half say it isn't. There are some that are nearly unanimous verdicts from the film, but were called differently in real time at game speed. It's a very hard call to make.
I've had one targeting call this year and it was on a kickoff return, not a play from scrimmage. Even that was hard to see on the video. When it happened, I had a flag on a member of the kicking team. Another member of the kicking team asked "That was targeting, wasn't it?" Before I said anything one of his teammates said "Obviously." then he yelled at the guy who made the hit something about "Play smarter than that." The guy who was flagged got up, smacked his own head, then held out his hand to the ball carrier and said something that I took as an apology because they dapped hands. I thought the video would show it clear as day, but it didn't. On video, it was hard to tell if they even touched. Funny how that works.
