Ejection or No? (Video)

SCalScoreKeeper

Video has surfaced from a game out here on Friday night that I think warrants discussion.Watch white #29 after the tackle is made come in and kick the ball carrier as he is getting up after the hit.No penalty flag thrown by the game officials? This should be unsportsmanlike conduct personal foul and quite possibly ejection right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZWEXw2n5T4

Ed Maeder

Most definitely a dead ball flagrant personal foul. As Rich said many things on this play.

Rich

Never mind the upward thrust and targeting on the hit that took the kid's helmet off....and the UNS foul that the coach should've received for coming onto the field to celebrate the hit.

Just ugly all around.

InsideTheStripe

Rich wrote
Never mind the upward thrust and targeting on the hit that took the kid's helmet off....and the UNS foul that the coach should've received for coming onto the field to celebrate the hit.

Just ugly all around.

DSQ for the kicker.
UNS for the coach.

Don't have targeting there.

HLin NC

Actually what you have, SCal, is a flagrant personal foul for the kick. In NFHS, contact fouls are personal fouls, not USC. The coach should draw the USC for coming on to the field.

I had to run it back several times to see the kick so I'm not going to judge the on field crew but it does show the need for vigilance in dead ball officiating.

Welpe

Agree Rich this is definitely targeting in both NFHS and NCAA.

bigjohn

and it appears the kid that lost his helmet had to leave the game so no foul caused it to come off???

CT1

Assuming a 5-man crew, who would see the coach? The BJ, maybe?

The hit by #3 is targeting, IMO. Crouch and launch with the head into the head of the runner.

Rich

CT1 wrote
Assuming a 5-man crew, who would see the coach? The BJ, maybe?

The hit by #3 is targeting, IMO. Crouch and launch with the head into the head of the runner.

The wing if he had stayed closer to the sideline like he was supposed to and wasn't soooooo focused on the spot. And needlessly winding a clock on a ball that was almost at the numbers.

I'm not sure if the hit is a launch....I'd call it an upward thrust, which is still a red flag for targeting.

(I watched again. Looks like he *might* have left his feet -- so, either or. Tomato, to-mah-to. It's still targeting.)

HLin NC

Apparently things got worse.....
Helmetless player kicked in game, his family allegedly later attacks opponents | USA Today High School Sports | USA Today High School Sports

jchamp

Concussions aren't going to kill high school football. Crazy, undisciplined adults encouraging their kids to engage in unsportsmanlike behavior are going to kill football.
But concussions will be the scapegoat.

CT1

Rich wrote
The wing if he had stayed closer to the sideline like he was supposed to and wasn't soooooo focused on the spot. And needlessly winding a clock on a ball that was almost at the numbers.

I really can't fault the wing here. By the time the coach comes onto the field, the melee had already started, and his attention is on the group of players.

Our state's mechanics require us to wind the clock on ANY play that ends in-bounds between the bottom of the numbers & the sideline. The purpose, of course, is to get officials used to doing it so that when it really matters, it will be second nature.