Michigan TD Overturned - You Make The Call

[Bobref]

This is the controversial replay overturn of the Michigan TD. The Wolverines coughed it up on the next play in what might have been the pivotal play sequence of the game. This is an unbelievably close play. It embodies several fundamental concepts about catch, possession, etc. Call on the field by the back judge, who was in pretty good position, was a TD.

 

Edited January 1, 2023 by Bobref

[Irishman]

Like the announcers said, the ball bounced off him initially, but as he gained control/caught the pass, the ball was over the line. 

 

Another critical call, on the 4th down play at the end, the potential of targeting being called allows Michigan to keep possession and still have a chance to win. In my mind, there is no question the defender used the crown of his helmet. I also thought first contact was made with the back of the helmet. My guess was it was not called because the defender also used his forearm to make contact. 

[Bobref]

7 minutes ago, Irishman said:

Like the announcers said, the ball bounced off him initially, but as he gained control/caught the pass, the ball was over the line. 

 

Another critical call, on the 4th down play at the end, the potential of targeting being called allows Michigan to keep possession and still have a chance to win. In my mind, there is no question the defender used the crown of his helmet. I also thought first contact was made with the back of the helmet. My guess was it was not called because the defender also used his forearm to make contact. 

Keep in mind the critical fact that the runner was not a defenseless player. That makes all the difference when deciding whether to call targeting. 

[Irishman]

7 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Keep in mind the critical fact that the runner was not a defenseless player. That makes all the difference when deciding whether to call targeting. 

hmmmmmm.......in my mind he was defenseless. If the hit came from in front of him, I would agree with you. But with the way the back of his head was exposed and in the position it was in, it sure seems like he was defenseless. 

[Bobref]

5 minutes ago, Irishman said:

hmmmmmm.......in my mind he was defenseless. If the hit came from in front of him, I would agree with you. But with the way the back of his head was exposed and in the position it was in, it sure seems like he was defenseless. 

By rule, a runner is only defenseless when his forward progress is stopped and he is being held up, or when he’s already on the ground.

[Irishman]

27 minutes ago, Bobref said:

By rule, a runner is only defenseless when his forward progress is stopped and he is being held up, or when he’s already on the ground.

From what I read, that is just one standard for the call, but not the only indicator. There are other indicators that could occur for targeting to be called. 
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/college-football-targeting-rule-penalty-ejection/yqdcwtpqt13vpmj7bcseti5d 

"

ARTICLE 4. 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. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

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 indications of targeting (emphasis NCAA's) 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 feet first"

The video in the link is an explanation of the most recent updates in ruling what is targeting. A key point in the video states that use of the crown of the helmet is targeting, no matter where the contact occurs. 

[Bobref]

3 hours ago, Irishman said:

From what I read, that is just one standard for the call, but not the only indicator. There are other indicators that could occur for targeting to be called. 

I didn’t mean to suggest that only defenseless players can be the victims of targeting. Only that it is much easier to “target” a defenseless player than one who is not.

[oldtimeqb]

On 1/1/2023 at 10:56 AM, Bobref said:

By rule, a runner is only defenseless when his forward progress is stopped and he is being held up, or when he’s already on the ground.

Regarding the last play, the tackler had the ball carrier in his grasp and they were in the process of going to the ground.  This was the second defender coming in on the play and as @Irishman pointed out there were multiple indicators of targeting.  

I saw it as targeting live during the play but figured there was no way they would call it given the time/score.  (Watch any Hail Mary attempt for OPI/DPI as examples of not calling a penalty due to time/score.)  Then when they reviewed the hit, I assumed they would have to call it since it was so obvious, IMO.

As far as the TD, I do not see any clear/obvious evidence to overturn the call on the field.  Bad decision - which became magnified with Michigan's worse decision to attempt a handoff to a converted defensive player.  And don't even get me started on trick plays on the goal line.   

[JustRules]

On the targeting call I've had several veteran college officials disagree on whether the contact was initiated with the crown or not. And they are all watching the same video. It's amazing how we can all watch the same thing and see different things. That's why even replay is not perfect.