Post by Funkytown on Mar 28, 2018 18:26:29 GMT -6
RUIZ: The new 'targeting' rule could have affected 24 plays in a single half of a Bengals-Steelers game
...
More at the link: ftw.usatoday.com/2018/03/nfl-rule-changes-2018-targeting-helmet-to-helmet-bengals-steelers
If you’re a fan of college football’s targeting rule, I’ve got good news: The NFL is getting its very own version of it, starting next season. League owners unanimously passed a rule that outlaws lowering the helmet and using it to initiate contact with an opponent.
While the rule has been passed, the league still has to formulate the official language and set a standard for what will be considered a flaggable hit. Right now, this is all we have from the league:
“Lowering the head to initiate contact with the helmet is a foul.”
So how will this affect the game? To get a sense, we reviewed the first-half of the Week 13 Steelers-Bengals game on Monday Night Football and tried to identify as many of these now-illegal hits as we could.
Here’s what we found…
While the rule has been passed, the league still has to formulate the official language and set a standard for what will be considered a flaggable hit. Right now, this is all we have from the league:
“Lowering the head to initiate contact with the helmet is a foul.”
So how will this affect the game? To get a sense, we reviewed the first-half of the Week 13 Steelers-Bengals game on Monday Night Football and tried to identify as many of these now-illegal hits as we could.
Here’s what we found…
*Over the course of 75 first-half plays, we found 39 possible penalties on 24 plays. Based on the language above, 22 of those possible penalties were obvious calls, leaving 17 borderline calls.
*Running plays were far more likely to include a possible penalty. Of the 24 runs in the first half, 13 plays included a questionable hit. On those 13 plays, we saw 26 possible penalties, 15 of which were deemed “obvious” penalties.
*On 43 passes, we saw just 10 plays including at least one questionable hit. Six of those plays included at least one obvious penalty.
*Defenders were twice as likely to commit these penalties. We counted 24 possible flags on defensive players compared to 13 for offensive players. The remaining two flags came on one kickoff return.
Now let’s put all of that into context. We’ll set aside the borderline calls, leaving us with 22 penalty plays, not including the seven penalties that were actually called in the first half of the game. So, with the new targeting rule in place, we would have seen 29 penalties in the first half alone! Refs called about 6.7 penalties per half during the 2017 season.
If the league fails to come up with language that sets a standard for what will and will not be flagged, the 2018 season could fall off the rails because of this rule change.
*Running plays were far more likely to include a possible penalty. Of the 24 runs in the first half, 13 plays included a questionable hit. On those 13 plays, we saw 26 possible penalties, 15 of which were deemed “obvious” penalties.
*On 43 passes, we saw just 10 plays including at least one questionable hit. Six of those plays included at least one obvious penalty.
*Defenders were twice as likely to commit these penalties. We counted 24 possible flags on defensive players compared to 13 for offensive players. The remaining two flags came on one kickoff return.
Now let’s put all of that into context. We’ll set aside the borderline calls, leaving us with 22 penalty plays, not including the seven penalties that were actually called in the first half of the game. So, with the new targeting rule in place, we would have seen 29 penalties in the first half alone! Refs called about 6.7 penalties per half during the 2017 season.
If the league fails to come up with language that sets a standard for what will and will not be flagged, the 2018 season could fall off the rails because of this rule change.
More at the link: ftw.usatoday.com/2018/03/nfl-rule-changes-2018-targeting-helmet-to-helmet-bengals-steelers
... and neither is this Chris guy.