Nick Ruffin

[eibua12 81]

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?

The big debate is because some people think he hit him in the chest and some don't, most understand a flag was called but at the end of the day IMHO the rule has piss poor wording and that is on purpose. If you hit me even in my chest you will hit my neck and head area it is impossible not to hit my otherwise and there is a very small margin of error. We are talking what 2-4 inches max! Anything below the sternum is not the chest. Also if you hit some real hard in the chest their head snaps back go figure. From the Vine video that was posted in this thread (since I haven't seen the game) his inital contact what high chest/shoulder with his head straight up and from the impact the receiver's head comes forward and hits Nick's helmet which in the follow through stage of the tackle. We need to apply physics to targeting and look at the mechanics of the human body because it is BS that players must shy away. If Nick would have hit him lower chest and lower I think the receiver gets hurt. The receiver also lowered as stated because of his momentum coming down from the catch this also squished his frame to be smaller and make the strike zone much smaller. At the end of the day I am all for safety but taking away something from a sport built on aggression and expecting 18 year old kids to be perfect is lunacy. I would love for sports science to break down that play. Oh and if he hits him low his career is over there was an outside the lines segment on it and the NFL players has said more injuries are happening and will going forward and the devastation is much more than hitting waist up, they are doing this to make sure there is no way the refs can call it I mean after all they are getting paid and that cost them money!

[GBAU83 212]

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.

Agree with you War Tiger - when I saw it live I started looking for the flag. The difference is a fan perspective versus someone who wears the zebra stripes. I hated seeing him go, but it was the right call. As another posted, had he come in and wrapped up (rather than just busting into him), it might would have only been late hit and not targeting.

[JFDTiger80 790]

Bottom line to me that that it looks like Ruffin will be a very good player. He is aggressive tackles good and is fast.

[cooltigger21 0]

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.

Agree with you War Tiger - when I saw it live I started looking for the flag. The difference is a fan perspective versus someone who wears the zebra stripes. I hated seeing him go, but it was the right call. As another posted, had he come in and wrapped up (rather than just busting into him), it might would have only been late hit and not targeting.

that is my beef. He doesn't need to try to blow someone up, just make the sure tackle.

[AUFlyer99 647]

Seems the common belief is that Ruffin is suspended for the Moo State game as well. Heard a coach talking about it post game, and on the radio this morning.

What's the deal?

[Auburn4Winners 0]

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.

Agree with you War Tiger - when I saw it live I started looking for the flag. The difference is a fan perspective versus someone who wears the zebra stripes. I hated seeing him go, but it was the right call. As another posted, had he come in and wrapped up (rather than just busting into him), it might would have only been late hit and not targeting.

that is my beef. He doesn't need to try to blow someone up, just make the sure tackle.

As much as I'd like to say I agree, I can't. The best way to stop that pass as a safety is to blow the guy up. If it had been a catch and he blew him up hard like that, the guy drops the catch or fumbles and the "defenseless player" rule goes out the window. It would have gone from a penalty to a great play. I agree with the flag being thrown but I think it was as borderline as it gets.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Bottom line to me that that it looks like Ruffin will be a very good player. He is aggressive tackles good and is fast.

[ertrader 198]

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..

Speaking of tackling, this tackle by Brandon King brought a tear to my eye

[mikeymac 8]

Yeah it was nice to seem something out of King. The form in that tackle was textbook.

[IronMan70 3,277]

The WR was juggling the ball and I thought it was a good tough "shoulder to shoulder" hit. I think the call was bs. I also think a couple of our pass interence calls were bs (not including Trovon's at the 5 yd line) while at the same time letting LSU get away with grabbing Sammie and Duke's arms before the ball got there.

The refs need to be much more consistent, not only in targeting from game to game, but also pass interference within a game. Yes, I watched all those plays on replay, in slow motion, stop action, several times. Yes, I read every post in this thread.

[AUbritt 611]

The WR was juggling the ball and I thought it was a good tough "shoulder to shoulder" hit. I think the call was bs. I also think a couple of our pass interence calls were bs (not including Trovon's at the 5 yd line) while at the same time letting LSU get away with grabbing Sammie and Duke's arms before the ball got there.

The refs need to be much more consistent, not only in targeting from game to game, but also pass interference within a game. Yes, I watched all those plays on replay, in slow motion, stop action, several times. Yes, I read every post in this thread.

But did you read every post in slo-mo?

[IronMan70 3,277]

The WR was juggling the ball and I thought it was a good tough "shoulder to shoulder" hit. I think the call was bs. I also think a couple of our pass interence calls were bs (not including Trovon's at the 5 yd line) while at the same time letting LSU get away with grabbing Sammie and Duke's arms before the ball got there.

The refs need to be much more consistent, not only in targeting from game to game, but also pass interference within a game. Yes, I watched all those plays on replay, in slow motion, stop action, several times. Yes, I read every post in this thread.

But did you read every post in slo-mo?

..........

[jared52 4,354]

The targeting call in the MSU-aTm game was worse than this one. I can actually accept this one as being by the rulebook, but the aTm ejection was bad.

[cooltigger21 0]

Nick made the mistake of trying to blow up the receiver instead of trying to make the tackle like he was supposed to. If players would stop trying to make the highlight hits that get the attention of sportscenter and everyone else and just make a solid tackle a lot of this would go away. I don't think it was the proper call but I can see how the official would call it that way.

[alexava 6,973]

Nick made the mistake of trying to blow up the receiver instead of trying to make the tackle like he was supposed to. If players would stop trying to make the highlight hits that get the attention of sportscenter and everyone else and just make a solid tackle a lot of this would go away. I don't think it was the proper call but I can see how the official would call it that way.

wr was going nowhere = proper tackle.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Nick made the mistake of trying to blow up the receiver instead of trying to make the tackle like he was supposed to. If players would stop trying to make the highlight hits that get the attention of sportscenter and everyone else and just make a solid tackle a lot of this would go away. I don't think it was the proper call but I can see how the official would call it that way.

My thinking as well. Young (and smaller) kid trying to show out. He'll learn.

[WDavE 332]

My biggest problem with the rule in general and it came into play on the Ruffin hit. The offensive player crouched down some when he saw the hit coming. Thus, Ruffin hit him high.

On the review of these type penalties this should be part of the consideration.

[The Plainsman 948]

Every tackle is targeting if you think about it. If not then...............

[Randman5000 4,229]

Did Ellis mention this yet?

[cooltigger21 0]

Did Ellis mention this yet?

haven't heard anything from Ellis. Gus talked briefly and just said he was being aggressive just had to learn how to be smart. Wasn't upset or anything.

[jimpecht 14]

_{Any news on Ruffin? Is he eligible for this Saturday in Starkville?}

[Auctoritas 2,828]

_{Any news on Ruffin? Is he eligible for this Saturday in Starkville?}

There is no reason for him not to be. The foul occurred in the first half of the game, which means he sits out the next half, which would be the 2nd half. Unless he's done something other than the targeting, he should be on the field.

[ShocksMyBrain 9,366]

I thought it was spelled out pretty clearly earlier in the thread that he would be available for the entire game.

[TexasTiger 12,892]

I thought it was spelled out pretty clearly earlier in the thread that he would be available for the entire game.

Yeah, but is he available?

[eibua12 81]

I thought it was spelled out pretty clearly earlier in the thread that he would be available for the entire game.

Yeah, but is he available?

I need to give the Internet up until after football season