Nick Ruffin

[auburn4ever 1,266]

Will that ejection carry over to the Miss. State game? Will Nick miss any of next weeks game?

[NoALtiger 3,863]

Will that ejection carry over to the Miss. State game? Will Nick miss any of next weeks game?

Negative

[bigbird 60,532]

Running full speed, you close the distance of 5 yards in about 1/2 sec throw in the WR closing the distance at a high rate also and it is very negligible. If focused on the WR and not the ball, it would be very difficult to realize if the ball was caught or not. Clean hit, but called targeting. Nothing to do but move on and keep hitting.

[bigbird 60,532]

Will that ejection carry over to the Miss. State game? Will Nick miss any of next weeks game?

No, 1st half ejections take you out for the current game. 2nd half ejections carry over to the first half of the next game. Nick plays verse MSU.

[WarTiger 3,901]

The refs seemed overly sensitive the whole game, to me. I thought the other late hit call was bogus, too. It's like they expect the players to be able to see what is happening away from where they are. Ruffin hit before the play was dead, and if there was any contact the the head, it was because the receive lowered his helmet. Ruffin even turned to avoid helmet to helmet. As for the other late hut, the runner was trying to tightrope the line and had not even slowed down.

It was like the refs preferred flag football at times.

I agree about the other late hit. If you get the chance to watch a replay of the game, just listen for the official's whistle. The hit is before any whistle. NOBODY should be expected to stop a tackle in progress faster than an official can blow a whistle. "Late" should at least be after the whistle.

That would be relevant if the whistle mattered. The whistle doesn't always end the play. The player being down or out of bounds or in this case pass being obviously incomplete ends the play. The whistle is immaterial. In this case the ball is dead by rule so the whistle doesn't matter

ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball as provided in the rules or when

an official sounds his whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals

the ball dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II and A.R. 4-2-4-I).

As for the targeting call. IMO, all targeting calls can be avoided by practicing fundamental tackling. No player has been tossed for tackling with his head up (leading with the facemask), wrapping his arms around the ball carrier, and driving with his legs. Regardless of how hard a lick was passed.

That technique of tackling is NOT legal at all levels of football. In High school rules its called Face tackling or Butt blocking and its illegal. The only proper technique that is legal at all levels of football is leading with and making contact by using the shoulder. No part of the helmet should ever be used to make a tackle..

[WarTiger 3,901]

Clear no targeting, clearly not late. The DB's angle shows that he could not tell if the ball was caught or not and the ball hit the ground after ruffin cleaned it up. What are you supposed to do let the receiver catch the ball and run before we touch him? come on.

Actually that isn't even remotely true. There's no reason at all to not know that he didn't catch the ball. As you can see in this still frame the ball was thrown HIGH (not low) and Ruffin was FIVE YARDS away from him looking right at it. There's no way in hell he didn't know the ball wasn't caught. It was an absolute TEXT BOOK example of targeting AND hitting a defenseless player. EASY CALL.....

Rule reference:

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and initiate 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 (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-

I-VI)

He couldn't stop on a dime-- given his momentum it looked like he minimized the impact by moving his head to the side.

He didn't have too. As you can see in the screen shot above he had FIVE YARDS to stop.

The rule is all fine and dandy, but he hit him dead in the chest, not in the neck or head. That's what makes this not targeting. I don't care who you are you get hit that hard your neck will rag doll too. I realize that's mostly what brought the penalty, but he didn't hit I'm in the neck or head. It was shoulder to chest.

He wasn't anywhere close to hitting him in the chest. If you watched that and say he hit him in the chest, there isn't much I can do to help you there. You're just wrong. The rule says NECK AREA...not strictly neck or head. Also, read the rule again too... WHEN IN QUESTION ITS A FOUL... That's not hard to interpret. I'm guessing (well not really, I've seen it here too many times over the years) had the Auburn player been the one hit, people would have been going ape s*** over it being targeting. But because it was an Auburn player that made the hit, its all ok. It doesn't work that way. I'm honestly not sure why the big debate. The game is over, Ruffin will be eligible to play next week, so why is everybody so up in arms over it?

[bigbird 60,532]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

[TexasTiger 12,890]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is on people's opinions. It's a forum in which folks express their opinions.

[CleCoTiger 1,957]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

It was, therefore it is. I like it!

[bigbird 60,532]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is on people's opinions. It's a forum in which folks express their opinions.

I didn't state my opinion on other's opinions, but I appreciate you opining your opinion. Thank you.

[tiger88 934]

The fact of the matter is he aimed WAY too high and there was at least a little contact to the head. I can see why they didn't overturn it.

He will learn, I'm sure.

[cole256 17,083]

All I know is it has been a while since I have seen a safety at AU hit like NR. He has impressed me this year with his play.

Times a billion

[TexasTiger 12,890]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is on people's opinions. It's a forum in which folks express their opinions. ;)/>

I didn't state my opinion on other's opinions, but I appreciate you opining your opinion. Thank you.

I appreciate your appreciation.

[cole256 17,083]

I guess this is what gets me. It seemed to me that the wr sort of drew up a little when he was about to take a hit. What if you're lunging at a guy and he goes lower than you aimed after you committed to the tackle?

[augolf1716 21,166]

:popcorn:

[17-16 21]

The refs seemed overly sensitive the whole game, to me. I thought the other late hit call was bogus, too. It's like they expect the players to be able to see what is happening away from where they are. Ruffin hit before the play was dead, and if there was any contact the the head, it was because the receive lowered his helmet. Ruffin even turned to avoid helmet to helmet. As for the other late hut, the runner was trying to tightrope the line and had not even slowed down.

It was like the refs preferred flag football at times.

I agree about the other late hit. If you get the chance to watch a replay of the game, just listen for the official's whistle. The hit is before any whistle. NOBODY should be expected to stop a tackle in progress faster than an official can blow a whistle. "Late" should at least be after the whistle.

That would be relevant if the whistle mattered. The whistle doesn't always end the play. The player being down or out of bounds or in this case pass being obviously incomplete ends the play. The whistle is immaterial. In this case the ball is dead by rule so the whistle doesn't matter

ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball as provided in the rules or when

an official sounds his whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals

the ball dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II and A.R. 4-2-4-I).

As for the targeting call. IMO, all targeting calls can be avoided by practicing fundamental tackling. No player has been tossed for tackling with his head up (leading with the facemask), wrapping his arms around the ball carrier, and driving with his legs. Regardless of how hard a lick was passed.

That technique of tackling is NOT legal at all levels of football. In High school rules its called Face tackling or Butt blocking and its illegal. The only proper technique that is legal at all levels of football is leading with and making contact by using the shoulder. No part of the helmet should ever be used to make a tackle..

As far as the whistle, I was making reference to the late hit on the sideline. When the ball carrier is still running, he nor the defense may have known if he were out of bounds without the whistle being blown. It may still be targeting to lead with the facemask and wrap up while driving with the legs, but I personally have never seen it called against anyone.

[leglessdan 1,934]

:popcorn:/> :popcorn:/>

+1....I'm seeing how many pages this goes on for...WDE

[bigbird 60,532]

it doesn't matter what people's opinion on this are. It was called, therefore it was a penalty.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is on people's opinions. It's a forum in which folks express their opinions. ;)/>

I didn't state my opinion on other's opinions, but I appreciate you opining your opinion. Thank you.

I appreciate your appreciation.

Your appreciation is apparent.

[alexava 6,973]

Clear no targeting, clearly not late. The DB's angle shows that he could not tell if the ball was caught or not and the ball hit the ground after ruffin cleaned it up. What are you supposed to do let the receiver catch the ball and run before we touch him? come on.

Actually that isn't even remotely true. There's no reason at all to not know that he didn't catch the ball. As you can see in this still frame the ball was thrown HIGH (not low) and Ruffin was FIVE YARDS away from him looking right at it. There's no way in hell he didn't know the ball wasn't caught. It was an absolute TEXT BOOK example of targeting AND hitting a defenseless player. EASY CALL.....

Rule reference:

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and initiate 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 (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-

I-VI)

He couldn't stop on a dime-- given his momentum it looked like he minimized the impact by moving his head to the side.

He didn't have too. As you can see in the screen shot above he had FIVE YARDS to stop.

The rule is all fine and dandy, but he hit him dead in the chest, not in the neck or head. That's what makes this not targeting. I don't care who you are you get hit that hard your neck will rag doll too. I realize that's mostly what brought the penalty, but he didn't hit I'm in the neck or head. It was shoulder to chest.

He wasn't anywhere close to hitting him in the chest. If you watched that and say he hit him in the chest, there isn't much I can do to help you there. You're just wrong. The rule says NECK AREA...not strictly neck or head. Also, read the rule again too... WHEN IN QUESTION ITS A FOUL... That's not hard to interpret. I'm guessing (well not really, I've seen it here too many times over the years) had the Auburn player been the one hit, people would have been going ape s*** over it being targeting. But because it was an Auburn player that made the hit, its all ok. It doesn't work that way. I'm honestly not sure why the big debate. The game is over, Ruffin will be eligible to play next week, so why is everybody so up in arms over it?

This was not an obvious dropped pass. The wr brought it down and didnt bring it in but Nick was too close and moving too fast to stop. Any hit to the chest is close to the neck, hell they are connected. i don't think this should have been upheld on the replay but live it was high enough that i couldnt disagree with the initial call.

[alexava 6,973]

By the way will he have to sit the 1st half vs Moo St.? :-\

[doc4aday 1,887]

I as well as any good fan do not want to see any kid on the field injured by a hard hitting play. With that said, it was a bad call as far as Nick getting ejected.

Nick tried to go for the shoulder.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

Honest, non-smartass question: When does "neck area" cease being "neck area" and become the chest area? I mean, in theory, an argument could be made that since the trapezius muscle inserts at the top of the neck and extends all the way out to the acromion (point of the shoulder joint) that a square hit on top of the shoulder pads could be considered the "neck area."

I don't know - it just seems really vague, and I hate vague rules.

[aubfaninga 16]

The refs seemed overly sensitive the whole game, to me. I thought the other late hit call was bogus, too. It's like they expect the players to be able to see what is happening away from where they are. Ruffin hit before the play was dead, and if there was any contact the the head, it was because the receive lowered his helmet. Ruffin even turned to avoid helmet to helmet. As for the other late hut, the runner was trying to tightrope the line and had not even slowed down.

It was like the refs preferred flag football at times.

I agree about the other late hit. If you get the chance to watch a replay of the game, just listen for the official's whistle. The hit is before any whistle. NOBODY should be expected to stop a tackle in progress faster than an official can blow a whistle. "Late" should at least be after the whistle.

That would be relevant if the whistle mattered. The whistle doesn't always end the play. The player being down or out of bounds or in this case pass being obviously incomplete ends the play. The whistle is immaterial. In this case the ball is dead by rule so the whistle doesn't matter

ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball as provided in the rules or when

an official sounds his whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals

the ball dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II and A.R. 4-2-4-I).

As for the targeting call. IMO, all targeting calls can be avoided by practicing fundamental tackling. No player has been tossed for tackling with his head up (leading with the facemask), wrapping his arms around the ball carrier, and driving with his legs. Regardless of how hard a lick was passed.

That technique of tackling is NOT legal at all levels of football. In High school rules its called Face tackling or Butt blocking and its illegal. The only proper technique that is legal at all levels of football is leading with and making contact by using the shoulder. No part of the helmet should ever be used to make a tackle..

I think people are not considering that "intent" and "accidents" do not count.

#1 Did he have time to slow or avoid the contact? YES!!!

#2 Did he think the receiver might have the ball? maybe

#3 Was he focused only on the receiver and not the ball? maybe

#1 Trumps any debate and mind reading assumptions.

We know that he did not lead with helmet. We know that he did not launch. I have watched the video many times and for me his shoulder hit closer to the top portion of the shoulders rather than his chest. If Nick Ruffin had hit a running back in the same manner this >WOULD NOT BE AN ILLEGAL hit<. So why do I agree with the call? The term "defenseless player".

[AUBwins 10,075]

The LSU guy actually lowered a little from his momentum coming down. That made it more of a shoulder/head collision. Not intentional just bad luck. I do miss seeing safeties being able to lay the wood to keep receivers from wanting to cross the middle,but it is definitely dangerous.

[C'viewTiger 242]

If shoulder to head the way that play happened is targeting then Corey Grant should have been flagged for it as well when he lowered his shoulder on that defender late in the game. Just because it was an offensive player doing it doesn't make it any better

Its not just the shoulder to the head. Its the defensless player that makes it targeting. The db came in to hit cg, not a defensless player.