Targeting Rule: NFHS, NCAA, NFL, and CFL.

[SC Official]

In NFHS targeting doesn’t require a defenseless player. But it does require “taking aim” and making contact above the shoulders. The runner generally isn’t concerned with “taking aim” at a defender.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

In NFHS targeting doesn’t require a defenseless player. But it does require “taking aim” and making contact above the shoulders. The runner generally isn’t concerned with “taking aim” at a defender.

It is not required in either NF or NCAA, but it is a factor. More responsibility is on the person hitting a defenseless player. A runner is not a defenseless player in either and if there is helmet contact for lowering their shoulder to gain yardage, it can be considered not a foul or incidental in nature. In NCAA you can have targeting without any helmet area contact if you use the crown of your head.

Peace

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Thanks for all of the replies. It seems that an Offensive Player can get away with using his helmet while the Defensive Player cannot.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Thanks for all of the replies. It seems that an Offensive Player can get away with using his helmet while the Defensive Player cannot.

MTD, Sr.

It is not an issue of getting away with it, but runners are allowed to lower their head to gain yardage. Just because there is contact with helmets is not a foul at any level automatically. Runners are considered to be protecting themselves differently than players trying to hit them. Yes, they get more of the benefit of the doubt, but most of the time a runner is not using their head the same way when they have defenders or blockers trying to hit an opponent. Without actually seeing the play, it is hard to know what it looked like honestly.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

If the runner isn't projecting the helmet to gain an advantage, but only for protection, I'd ask whether, if the game were played without helmets (as for instance in American Sevens), the runner would act the same way with his head. Or even consider, if his helmet came off, but play couldn't stop in time to prevent a collision, would the runner adopt the same posture to protect himself?

I'm not trying to be flip, this is a serious question, and it may involve a tradeoff between possible head and neck injury. If I had to choose, knowing what I do, I'd risk my head before my neck, because the same blow that would result in a temporary KO if delivered to the chin would have a greater likelihood of a permanent neck injury if delivered to the crown or back of the head.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Thanks for all of the replies. It seems that an Offensive Player can get away with using his helmet while the Defensive Player cannot.

MTD, Sr.

For the record: NFHS 2-20-2: "TARGETING is an act by [B][I][U] any player[U][U][B][I] who takes aim and initiates contact against an opponent above the shoulders or below withe crown (top portion) of his helmet."

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Thanks for all of the replies. It seems that an Offensive Player can get away with using his helmet while the Defensive Player cannot

MTD, Sr.

Butt Blocking (NFHS 2-20-1a) and Spearing (NFHS 2-20-1b) along with Targeting (NFHS 2-20-2) each specify "an act by ANY player (which includes both Offensive and Defensive players)