From the latest edition of The Chronicle:

Refs group issues statement about targeting call in Northern Illinois-Ohio game

By KALEB CARTER

Bill Carollo, Coordinator of Football Officials for the Collegiate Officiating Consortium, which oversees the MAC, Big Ten and Missouri Valley Conference issued a statement in response to the Daily Chronicle's request for comment to the Mid-American Conference concerning a hit by Ohio's Keye Thompson on Huskie sophomore Michael Kennedy in NIU's win at Ohio Saturday.

"The play was properly ruled both on the field and from the replay booth. Ohio No. 38 (Thompson) delivers a severe and forcible hit but a legal block with his shoulder to his opponents chest. (Targeting) was called as it was close to the head and neck area. The crown of No. 38 was not involved. (Targeting) was overturned but No. 38 then commits an (unsportsmanlike) foul after the hit for taunting his opponent. The UNS foul was the only foul enforced."

Thompson, who was injured on the play, the opening kickoff of the contest, was taken to the hospital and scanned for potential head and neck injuries, which came back negative, per a source close to the team.

(10-14-2019 08:39 PM)Beach Boy Wrote:  From the latest edition of The Chronicle:

Refs group issues statement about targeting call in Northern Illinois-Ohio game

By KALEB CARTER

Bill Carollo, Coordinator of Football Officials for the Collegiate Officiating Consortium, which oversees the MAC, Big Ten and Missouri Valley Conference issued a statement in response to the Daily Chronicle's request for comment to the Mid-American Conference concerning a hit by Ohio's Keye Thompson on Huskie sophomore Michael Kennedy in NIU's win at Ohio Saturday.

"The play was properly ruled both on the field and from the replay booth. Ohio No. 38 (Thompson) delivers a severe and forcible hit but a legal block with his shoulder to his opponents chest. (Targeting) was called as it was close to the head and neck area. The crown of No. 38 was not involved. (Targeting) was overturned but No. 38 then commits an (unsportsmanlike) foul after the hit for taunting his opponent. The UNS foul was the only foul enforced."

Thompson, who was injured on the play, the opening kickoff of the contest, was taken to the hospital and scanned for potential head and neck injuries, which came back negative, per a source close to the team.

Already posted my thoughts on another thread, but, it's so nice to see that Thompson the thug is okay.

(I hope that's just a typo by the consummate professionals at the Chronicle :eyeroll: )

Yes the truly horrifying part of the play was what happened afterward. It made me think, maybe there needs to be a rule that forcible contact with a player AFTER it is apparent the play is over and the player is injured needs to be dealt with more severely. In that respect, I think the mini-head butt after the play while Kennedy was injured was grounds for ejection.

(10-14-2019 09:36 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Yes the truly horrifying part of the play was what happened afterward. It made me think, maybe there needs to be a rule that forcible contact with a player AFTER it is apparent the play is over and the player is injured needs to be dealt with more severely. In that respect, I think the mini-head butt after the play while Kennedy was injured was grounds for ejection.

EXACTLY!!!! They say (admit) that the Ohio player hit Kennedy when he was down, and they call it unsportsman like. But, was it not a helmet to helmet hit? Why is THAT not "targeting?"

Is there a part of the newer rules which try to prevent a defenseless player from getting popped hard? or a player getting blind sided?
Don't parse my words there, I'm not trying to be exact, but 'I thought' the spirit of these rules was to minimize life changing injury plays, with head targeting simply being the most common type of play involved?

Anyone know?

(10-15-2019 10:02 PM)NIU84 Wrote:  Is there a part of the newer rules which try to prevent a defenseless player from getting popped hard? or a player getting blind sided?
Don't parse my words there, I'm not trying to be exact, but 'I thought' the spirit of these rules was to minimize life changing injury plays, with head targeting simply being the most common type of play involved?

Anyone know?

Im not positive. But this came up when Tucker got clocked. But someone pointed out, correctly, that targeting philosophy still applies to defenseless player rule- "above the shoulder hits on defenseless players".

BUT what's interesting here is when this occurred. You can never hit a defenseless player in the head...duh...you can't hit anyone in the head anymore. But you can hit a defenseless player depending on rules specific to his position. The NCAA has 11 scenarios for a defenseless player. The only rules I can find referenced are for QBs, WRs, returners and Kickers. So what about gunners and blockers? IDK.

(10-16-2019 08:14 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 10:02 PM)NIU84 Wrote:  Is there a part of the newer rules which try to prevent a defenseless player from getting popped hard? or a player getting blind sided?
Don't parse my words there, I'm not trying to be exact, but 'I thought' the spirit of these rules was to minimize life changing injury plays, with head targeting simply being the most common type of play involved?

Anyone know?

Im not positive. But this came up when Tucker got clocked. But someone pointed out, correctly, that targeting philosophy still applies to defenseless player rule- "above the shoulder hits on defenseless players".

BUT what's interesting here is when this occurred. You can never hit a defenseless player in the head...duh...you can't hit anyone in the head anymore. But you can hit a defenseless player depending on rules specific to his position. The NCAA has 11 scenarios for a defenseless player. The only rules I can find referenced are for QBs, WRs, returners and Kickers. So what about gunners and blockers? IDK.

Our guy was hit hard in the chest and went down like a ton of bricks, the Ohio guy got on top of him and head butted him. How is that head butt not hitting a defenseless player?

I just don't know.

(10-16-2019 08:49 AM)chihuskie Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 08:14 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 10:02 PM)NIU84 Wrote:  Is there a part of the newer rules which try to prevent a defenseless player from getting popped hard? or a player getting blind sided?
Don't parse my words there, I'm not trying to be exact, but 'I thought' the spirit of these rules was to minimize life changing injury plays, with head targeting simply being the most common type of play involved?

Anyone know?

Im not positive. But this came up when Tucker got clocked. But someone pointed out, correctly, that targeting philosophy still applies to defenseless player rule- "above the shoulder hits on defenseless players".

BUT what's interesting here is when this occurred. You can never hit a defenseless player in the head...duh...you can't hit anyone in the head anymore. But you can hit a defenseless player depending on rules specific to his position. The NCAA has 11 scenarios for a defenseless player. The only rules I can find referenced are for QBs, WRs, returners and Kickers. So what about gunners and blockers? IDK.

Our guy was hit hard in the chest and went down like a ton of bricks, the Ohio guy got on top of him and head butted him. How is that head butt not hitting a defenseless player?

I just don't know.

If I had to gas I’d say they just don’t have a rule that applies to that scenario. If it wasn’t the crown of his helmet they can’t use targeting and if they want to use defenseless player it has to match one of the 11 scenarios they have. It’s one of those weird situation we are common sense and the eye test don’t apply.

IMO...Everything revolves around what the "intent" of the hit is. We see guys dq'd and suspended for targeting when they can't avoid head to head contact (ie: receiver lowers head during a catch), yet during this clean hit this player's intent was clearly to hurt and embarrass a player. That seems to be way worse than some of these targeting calls and have no place in today's game. The OU kid should have been dq'd.

I agree with Hammock's comment in this week's press conference that the initial hit was a clean play. However I think that there should be consequences beyond a 15 yard penalty for hitting Kennedy when he was down and then celebrating.

Thompson's actions reminded me of AJD's equally bad actions in viciously poking a San Diego State player in the eye while he was down from a tackle a couple of years ago. After that game NIU immediately did the right thing and suspended him for a game. If "Oh You" has any integrity they will do the same with Thompson though if that was going to happen it probably would have by now. I also think that the MAC can and should suspend Thompson for a game. Failing to do so sends a message that this behavior is acceptable and will earn at most a slap on the wrist.

(10-16-2019 10:05 AM)bucket_brigade Wrote:  IMO...Everything revolves around what the "intent" of the hit is. We see guys dq'd and suspended for targeting when they can't avoid head to head contact (ie: receiver lowers head during a catch), yet during this clean hit this player's intent was clearly to hurt and embarrass a player. That seems to be way worse than some of these targeting calls and have no place in today's game. The OU kid should have been dq'd.

There’s just no rules that cover intent. The vaguest rule is probably personal foul. That can be applied more liberally than targeting or defenseless player. What they need to do is follow the NBA’s flagrant 1 or 2. Have personal foul 1&2 with 2 having an ejection.

(10-16-2019 08:14 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 10:02 PM)NIU84 Wrote:  Is there a part of the newer rules which try to prevent a defenseless player from getting popped hard? or a player getting blind sided?
Don't parse my words there, I'm not trying to be exact, but 'I thought' the spirit of these rules was to minimize life changing injury plays, with head targeting simply being the most common type of play involved?

Anyone know?

Im not positive. But this came up when Tucker got clocked. But someone pointed out, correctly, that targeting philosophy still applies to defenseless player rule- "above the shoulder hits on defenseless players".

BUT what's interesting here is when this occurred. You can never hit a defenseless player in the head...duh...you can't hit anyone in the head anymore. But you can hit a defenseless player depending on rules specific to his position. The NCAA has 11 scenarios for a defenseless player. The only rules I can find referenced are for QBs, WRs, returners and Kickers. So what about gunners and blockers? IDK.

Thanks, it's the word 'defenseless' in the quoted phrase above I was thinking of.

And what makes a player defenseless? If they're lying on the ground, are they defenseless?

I believe there is a rule about blind-sided hits now, but not sure how that is applied.

I agree with bucket brigade, that hit was far worse than many of the targeting calls, partly because it was obviously intentional.