The mere fact that the tackle was reviewed is ridiculous

[DAG10]

There is no way that was targeting, and, it is SO bad it is unbelievable.

The B1G could not even come close to apologizing enough for just how bad Purdue has repeatedly been screwed by officials.

 

[Boilerinspirit]

Somebody in B1G office has it in for us!

 

[YeOldeCup]

There is no way that was targeting, and, it is SO bad it is unbelievable.

The B1G could not even come close to apologizing enough for just how bad Purdue has repeatedly been screwed by officials.

That was a ridiculous call and review.

 

[Tommaker]

Now we'll get some no-account, don't matter calls on Rutgers so the numbers look good.

 

[punaj]

Total F-ing BS

 

[Tommaker]

I'm waiting on the "holding" call on Plummer.

 

[NVboiler]

What about Durham being deliberating kicked by a defender right in front of a ref early in the game. Was there a penalty and was the player ejected?

 

[SLoopBoiler]

That the officials need to insert themselves on a unimportant play is troubling

 

[DAG10]

That the officials need to insert themselves on a unimportant play is troubling

Well said...ridiculous that it happened. That was a great read, a clean tackle and played well. How that was deemed targeting by anyone is troubling as well.

Never mind on the ensuing kickoff return, Sheffield is tackled and a Rutgers guy literally dives on him while he is on the ground and spears him in the back...which is far closer to the actual definition of targeting, and, no call was even made.

 

[BCfanatic2020]

There is no way that was targeting, and, it is SO bad it is unbelievable.

The B1G could not even come close to apologizing enough for just how bad Purdue has repeatedly been screwed by officials.

Doesn’t the helmet have to hit his head or neck area?

 

[SLoopBoiler]

It’s bad enough when officials make bad calls at end of game that have direct measurable impact, but calls like the roughing the quarterback on Rutgers interception (when he hit the qb in his thigh pads), the missed call on the grabbing & face-guarding/PI in the end zone in the first quarter, and the unnecessary Targeting ejection of Barnes are momentum changers that can change how a team calls a game...

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Doesn’t the helmet have to hit his head or neck area?

No, not if it is deemed that the crown of the helmet was used. Here's an excerpt of the rule:

Rule 9 - Conduct of Players and Others Subject to the Rules

Section 1. Personal Fouls

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet
ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I)

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

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

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

 

[RU#1fan]

What about Durham being deliberating kicked by a defender right in front of a ref early in the game. Was there a penalty and was the player ejected?

How about on 3rd down and 11 and Bell pushing off the Rutgers CB Young in the Endzone for a TD.
A BS non-call.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

well,, you did get away with the offensive PI on a 3rd and 10 for a TD... making up for that bad PI call with Minny.

But, yeah, that wasn't targeting in my book.. though we have seen crap like that called.

 

[jmohlman]

How about on 3rd down and 11 and Bell pushing off the Rutgers CB Young in the Endzone for a TD.
A BS non-call.

Open your eyes, he didn’t push off he had his hands on him to help him gain balance there was no extension of the elbows which is how you actually push someone if case they didn’t go over that in your high school class.

 

[jmohlman]

I don’t think the officials “have it in for us“, I think they’re just really shitty in general. Officiating has gotten just about as bad as it could ever get. Probably in basketball and football. I don’t know that they intend to make these shitty ass calls just missed us, I think they just plain suck and have no damned idea what they’re doing. It’s pretty obvious they don’t know much about the game.

Anymore I’m not gonna get upset about it because it’s just not worth it. I DVR the game because I’m tired of watching bullshit happen that ruins my evening so this way if we decide not to play defense like we did tonight I can just fast forward through the “non-football part of the game“.

 

[indyogb]

Upon further review, maybe we might have been better off if the Big Ten had not resuscitated the season.

Looking at it from another angle - we've lost three games by 17 total points. I think some of the frustration might also be due to how some of the traditional powers are terrible this year while some doormats are actually playing well. It's still not over, and redemption is still quite possible.

 

[NVboiler]

Anymore I’m not gonna get upset about it because it’s just not worth it. I DVR the game because I’m tired of watching bullshit happen that ruins my evening so this way if we decide not to play defense like we did tonight I can just fast forward through the “non-football part of the game“.

I think that my father greatly extended his life by just turning off the TV when the game wasn't going the way he wanted or there was bad officiating.

I noticed someone else doing the same on the game thread this game. He said watching it was taking 10 years off his life. Luckily I couldn't watch it but have to listen to it on the radio which is painful enough. But if I could watch it on TV, I'm old enough that those 10 years would have killed me!

 

[SLoopBoiler]

How about on 3rd down and 11 and Bell pushing off the Rutgers CB Young in the Endzone for a TD.
A BS non-call.

he didn’t push - he is allowed to his space and arms out

 

[sunsetregret]

Rutgers fan here. This was an embarrassing call and I feel bad for #55. The officials totally screwed him. The league should apologize to him personally.

 

[Westcoast]

Rutgers fan here. This was an embarrassing call and I feel bad for #55. The officials totally screwed him. The league should apologize to him personally.

While it doesn't seem fair or necessary, it definitely fit the definition of targeting. He led with the crown of his helmet. I don't agree with kicking someone out of the game. But if they see, they are supposed to call it. And of course its reviewable.

As for the 2 hands in the back of the RU defender on the TD pass, that could get called. He definitely used it to create space and an advantage. But it was pretty minor.

As for getting screwed, we lost last week because the officials didn't call a blatant pick route that gave UM the winning TD. Then they call us for a much less blatant pick and cost us 4 pts.

 

[CERU00]

No, not if it is deemed that the crown of the helmet was used. Here's an excerpt of the rule:

Rule 9 - Conduct of Players and Others Subject to the Rules

Section 1. Personal Fouls

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet
ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I)

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

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

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feetfirst.

Seems like a majority of fans on both boards don't know the rule!

 

[DJ Spanky]

I wrote about this elsewhere. The hit Barnes put on our guy, although technically matching the criteria for targeting, looked like a pretty damn good tackle where the receiver came into his (Barnes) helmet. I thought that was a real ticky-tacky application of the rule. When it's egregious it should be called, but in cases like this I hate seeing players get thrown out of the game.

 

[pu1985]

Despite all the technical jargon for the actual rule...
It was put in place to penalize the “head hunters” that roam the field, looking to knock opponents from the game (see Jack Tatum).
It has been completely bastardized at this point...to the point where we have faceless officials stopping play from some remote location, with no call on the field, impacting the outcome of games and having nothing, zero, nada to do with the original intent of the rule. And it’s almost purely random at this time.
Ridiculous...

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

I wrote about this elsewhere. The hit Barnes put on our guy, although technically matching the criteria for targeting, looked like a pretty damn good tackle where the receiver came into his (Barnes) helmet. I thought that was a real ticky-tacky application of the rule. When it's egregious it should be called, but in cases like this I hate seeing players get thrown out of the game.

Despite all the technical jargon for the actual rule...
It was put in place to penalize the “head hunters” that roam the field, looking to knock opponents from the game (see Jack Tatum).
It has been completely bastardized at this point...to the point where we have faceless officials stopping play from some remote location, with no call on the field, impacting the outcome of games and having nothing, zero, nada to do with the original intent of the rule. And it’s almost purely random at this time.
Ridiculous...

I tend to agree here....designed to help with player safety and eliminate the really dangerous "head-hunting" hits.

There is a lot of subjectivity in applying the rule; however, there is no subjectivity in applying the penalty. If it "technically" fits the rule like DJ Spanky wrote, 15-yard penalty and disqualification without exception and regardless of what was called on the field. I'd like them to at least be able to have a situation where a player is not kicked out of the game. In egregious cases (again, that is a subjective standard), I'd have no problem where the player loses an additional game. Right now, a player needs three targeting disqualifications in the same season before a one-game suspension.

I also think, the presumption is that the official/review booth is going to lean toward targeting.....that may have not been the case when the rule first came about. JMHO.

The big change this year? IIRC, the disqualified player is allowed to remain on the field.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Barnes could have put that guy into next week if he wanted. not dirty at all. but the refs bail out a qb on a moron throw that left his man in the breeze. He got penalized because Rutgers is bad at football. gotta love it.