Big Ten officiating chief explains targeting reversal call

Donate To GopherHole
S

Some Day...Is Coming!

Some Day...Maybe?
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
1,572
Reaction score
0
Points
36
http://www.startribune.com/college-...sal-after-big-hit-on-mitch-leidner/347323842/

A......ma.........zing.

If forcible contact is from the hands then the arms would be extended. His left arm is folded into his body under Mitch's armpit and his right hand is not even contacting Mitch as the CROWN of his helmet hits Mitch's helmet.

He says his head was up. His head is down, you can see him lowering it before impact from any video angle, and a still photo shows it down with his eyes closed.

Forcible contact can be nowhere but the helmet when the helmet is extended beyond the rest of the body and the arms are folded. This, is the definition of targeting. Lewis is 6' 4"!

I believe Bill Carollo's email is [email protected] If anyone knows any different please correct.

This just goes back to the integrity of the game. Have enough integrity and be man enough to admit the mistake and move on. If he truly believes what he says then the Big Ten needs someone else in that position. He is convincing himself to support his guys, and himself. If you truly care about player safety, the game, and want to get rid of hits like that, you don't allow this to happen. Anyone with average to below average intelligence figures this play out pretty quickly when looking at replay. I showed it to about 5 non sports people and they cringed when they say it. I asked them with what body part and where did the defender hit the quarterback, all 5 said "with his helmet" and "the quarterbacks head". 3 of which were female coworkers who don't know squat about football.
 

great work Joe. what a bunch of buckeye hooey!! What an embarrassment for him to say that they still got it right. Wow
 


Eye of the beholder is correct. It's a judgement call. Second photo above clearly shows the hand under armpit. I just don't think there is anything in this play that is 100% targeting or intent to target. That being said, had they upheld the call they would have gotten it right as well. I also think fans from both teams would have understood upholding it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

This is a call that wouldn't have been reversed for teams like: Mn, Purdue, Ind., Maryland, Rutgers....
 


well said Aloha . It so dramatically effected the way the rest of the game was played. Where his hand was positioned has no input on the call. The helmet is all that matters.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Eye of the beholder is correct. It's a judgement call. Second photo above clearly shows the hand under armpit. I just don't think there is anything in this play that is 100% targeting or intent to target. That being said, had they upheld the call they would have gotten it right as well. I also think fans from both teams would have understood upholding it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That photo is after the crown of the helmet contacts Mitch's helmet and Mitch's head is snapping back from the "forcible contact". My God! 2 + 2 = 4, in case you were wondering. The ignorance amazes me.
 

hqdefault.jpg


B1G official "Well, I think..."
 

Just supports the conspiracy theory if you ask me. Makes the big and that guy look foolish and guilty.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 




Michigan State wasn't supposed to beat Harbaugh/Michigan. So take that Michigan State.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Eye of the beholder is correct. It's a judgement call. Second photo above clearly shows the hand under armpit. I just don't think there is anything in this play that is 100% targeting or intent to target. That being said, had they upheld the call they would have gotten it right as well. I also think fans from both teams would have understood upholding it.
Click to expand...

But, as Joe C accurately stated in the article.....the rules specifically states:

"If in question, it is a foul."

So, for the replay to official to overturn the call, he had to be 100% without question or doubt on the play. I see no way possible one can look at that play and come to the conclusion it was 100% not targeting. Therefore, if the replay official follows the rule, HE CANNOT OVERTURN the call on the field.

Embarrassing for the Big Ten to not only allow the overturn, but to then come back and CONFIRM it days later with the mumbled explanation? The supvisor's own words suggest it shouldn't have been overturned:

"If you look from behind, it looks like targeting. If you saw the officials on the field, they conferred. One threw the flag, and the other didn't think it was targeting."

Well, to me that is the very definition of question and/or doubt. The rule book says, "When in question, IT IS A FOUL."

End of story.
 

I agree that it should have been upheld. The rule should not include the term crown. Crown is defined as "top" of helmet. What is the top of a round object? Simply any forcible contact to a defenseless player to the neck or head should be a upheld as targeting.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 



Does anyone believe that if a Gopher hit a Buckeye like that the flag would be reversed? I don't.
 

What a crock of crap. Mr. Carollo should be fired for giving such a silly, incompetent answer.
 

The referee was ready: “After further review,” he said, “it is determined that the contact was not to the head or neck area. Targeting is reversed. Number 37 [Perry] remains in the ballgame. The result of the play is a touchdown.”
Click to expand...

This is what the ref said after they overturned the call. Even the biggest OSU homers can't say the contact was not to the head or neck area. They overturned it because of this, now they are changing their tune.

NCAA Rule 9.1.4 states: “No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul.”
Click to expand...

Pretty simple. I think the rule sucks, but it is the rule.

“They felt [Perry’s] hands came in first,” Carollo said. “Yes, there was contact to the head, but the forcible contact came into the chest area.
Click to expand...

[The helmet] came through, yes, but his face was up.
Click to expand...

So by forcible contact, does he mean that the brunt of the hit was in the chest area? Really? In the picture below, contact has already been made to the chest area, yet Leidner is still standing straight up. He started to go down once contact was made with his head. Also, it is pretty debatable that his face was up.


“Maybe we don’t have that [angle],” Carollo said. “But we have to make a decision in about a minute’s time, based on all the video angles that we have on TV.”
Click to expand...

And you need convincing evidence to overturn the call. If you don't have the best angle, then you go with the call on the field.

I think he is just trying to defend his refs here and thinks we're stupid.
 

He should have just said the B1G needs tOSU in the playoff. Honesty is the best policy.
 

http://noonkick.com/2015-minnesota-at-2-ohio-state/

fast forward to the 50:40 mark.

"after further review, it's been determined that the contact
has not been to the head or neck area.."

So the the crown of the helmet to the facemask would be,
where?

but according to this hangknob's explanation, you CAN hit
him in the head or neck area if he puts his hand in his arm
pit first???

#tO$U
 

Mr Bill Carollo is clearly kissing Buckeye butt and spewing a crock full of BS.
When you hit with the crown of the helmet you are spearing in all levels of football and that is a penalty. Contact to the head and neck area of a defenseless player is defined in the rule book as a penalty, especially to the facemask with the crown of the helmet. It is all of unecessary roughness, targeting, spearing. This forceable contact with the hand or arm first is a fallacy once you hit someone with the crown of your helmet in the head, it is a penalty doesn't matter if the other stuff happened first. None of that is open to interpretation it is a penalty.

You cannot hit with the crown of your helmet, that is the definition of targeting, in football period. Especially not in the head or neck area, none of this intent or phony judgement call explanation fly's.

This is a safety issue, and is what causes the whiplash effect and lingering effects of traumatic brain injury's. If your trying to protect players you cannot let this just go because it is a money school or premiere program. A hit like that may not have visible effects until down the line. After what has happened to Ben Utecth and all of those other former players they need to be studying the long term effects of hits like that. This is why plays like that, they do not belong in the game.

They don't want to admit that the freeze frame photo's clearly show the judgement call was wrong on the field and video replay was even a joke.
 

He dips his head right before impact, clearly visible from the end zone angle on the live fees.

What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a classic case of CYA. Repeat a lie often enough, especially from the lips of someone with a title, and some people will fall in line.

The game was close, OSU looked awful on offense to that point of the game, the officials were possibly influenced by the scared and angry crowd, and the official gave virtually no time to properly reviewing the call. Conspiracy? I don't know. More likely these officials have their own internal biases and who knows, maybe have a little money on the side.
 

The cowards didn't have the satchel to eject, nor the guts to reverse a touchdown. Gutless. Didn't have the fortitude to do the right thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tjgopher said:
But, as Joe C accurately stated in the article.....the rules specifically states:

"If in question, it is a foul."

So, for the replay to official to overturn the call, he had to be 100% without question or doubt on the play. I see no way possible one can look at that play and come to the conclusion it was 100% not targeting. Therefore, if the replay official follows the rule, HE CANNOT OVERTURN the call on the field.

Embarrassing for the Big Ten to not only allow the overturn, but to then come back and CONFIRM it days later with the mumbled explanation? The supvisor's own words suggest it shouldn't have been overturned:

"If you look from behind, it looks like targeting. If you saw the officials on the field, they conferred. One threw the flag, and the other didn't think it was targeting."

Well, to me that is the very definition of question and/or doubt. The rule book says, "When in question, IT IS A FOUL."

End of story.
Click to expand...

Great post! Keep making them look stupid! This really illustrates the stupidity! Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tikited said:
This is a call that wouldn't have been reversed for teams like: Mn, Purdue, Ind., Maryland, Rutgers....
Click to expand...

Agreed. Like I said in another thread - that very same day an Indiana player was ejected for a very similar hit. But for Michigan, OSU, PSU, they'll reverse that call.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
He dips his head right before impact, clearly visible from the end zone angle on the live fees.

What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a classic case of CYA. Repeat a lie often enough, especially from the lips of someone with a title, and some people will fall in line.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's a case of "cover your butts because you know you made a mistake".
 

tikited said:
This is a call that wouldn't have been reversed for teams like: Mn, Purdue, Ind., Maryland, Rutgers....
Click to expand...

Pretty much anyone other than Ohio State, on a play on which something big otherwise happened. They needed OSU to score to ensure piddly Minnesota didn't make OSU nervous and, god forbid, beat them. The house should be cleaned, because the integrity of the sport is being abused. However, all that matters anymore is $$$$$$$...and with that much money flying around, I doubt the replay referee went away without a nice tip after that one. Meanwhile, the B1G official is probably raking it in on the side as well, given that ludicrous answer. The incentive to lie is much higher in this case than the incentive to be forthright and just. It's that way way too often in college sports, and for that matter, for life in general.
 

There's no conspiracy here. Just a lack of guts and brains. Shame on you, Mr. Carollo.
 


You can't hide the stench from the biggest pile of manure this is. There are special rule interpretations for the likes of tOSU, and there are rules for everyone else.

This reeks of the B1G official dome liking the smell of a pile of money better by almost guaranteeing that tOSU be in the playoffs and not be upset by lowly Minnesota.
 

hungan1 said:
You can't hide the stench from the biggest pile of manure this is. There are special rule interpretations for the likes of tOSU, and there are rules for everyone else.

This reeks of the B1G official dome liking the smell of a pile of money better by almost guaranteeing that tOSU be in the playoffs and not be upset by lowly Minnesota.
Click to expand...

Oh, but it's all about player safety lmfao


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I haven't watched BTN since the hit. Have they shown the true picture yet or haven't they even mentioned it?
What has Mason said about it? You know since some people think he should be brought back as head coach or hired as the AD. I wonder what he or any new AD would or could do about evening out the playing field.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom