Targeting- can we have a real and honest talk about this

[LetsGoRabbits]

FIRST
EVERYTHING that happened immediately following the hit and beyond was WRONG and it is not, has NEVER BEEN, and will NEVER become, ANY part of what jackrabbit football/ or athletics in general are about!
that is all there is to say about that and i cannot imagine that ANYONE on this board would want to debate otherwise for even one second


But there does seem to be some debate about the hit itself. YES by the letter of the law it was targeting. he hit the receiver when the receiver was unable to protect himself. that is the ONLY reason this hit qualified as targeting.
HE DID NOT lead with his head
HE DID NOT contact the receiver above the shoulders
HE DID NOT launch himself

if there is another piece of this very questionable rule that i am missing. please add it. again i did not research this specifically before beginning. I am going off of what i remember and what i know after decades of coaching.

I AM SORRY but there should NOT BE ANY TIME during a football game when a player can NOT be hit. i DO NOT wish to see anyone get hurt!! but the absolute essence of football is that the players hit each other. (obviously i am talking about clean and legal hits!!!) saying that there is a time in a football game that a player cannot be hit is EXACTLY like saying that there is a time during a boxing match when one boxer cannot punch the other one in the face

A Thought: WHY are these hits completely the fault of the defense?

I will GUESS that there are stats available. but i can say with zero doubt that EASILY the biggest number of targeting hits, especially those that are the most brutal and most likely to cause injury, happen on ONE ROUTE!!

Deep Crossing Routes are without question the most dangerous. YES these hits can and do happen on other type of routes, but i GUARANTEE these are the most dangerous

therefore, WHY does the defense have to be penalized if the OC and the QB and the WR or other offensive player CHOOSE to attempt this route

i am sorry but if the offense CHOOSES to use these routes, the penalty for the defense for trying to stop them from being successful using these routes should be WAY WAY LESS

i will not speculate at this time what that would be but the defense should not carry all the blame and all the penalty

just something to throw out, NOT saying this should be the plan, but maybe something like if the QB throws a crossing route deeper than 7 yards and his receiver gets hit in a clean but dangerous way, why cant the QB get penalized? maybe he has to sit out the rest of that particular possession

anyway the jacks have had a LOT of these calls this year and they have paid a significant price, while also being shown, after extensive review to be doing this absolutely correct to the letter of the law on the majority of occasions!!

but since it has happened a lot, maybe it would be an interesting conversation for we fellow rabbit fans to have

OBVIOUSLY i am NOT saying that we will get these rules changed but the conversations that change the games we love have to begin somewhere

[Gojacks2487]

Great Post LetsGoRabbit. When I first saw the hit was wow Schuester hung his WR. Also I'm not totally convinced that our LB was taunting him just was extremely amped up from the adrenaline dump from the hit. I blame midco 100% for focusing on him and targeting him. When I watched the game over (only the second half lol) he was on the sideline showing his teammates his markless helmet. Anyone who ever has worn a FB helmet knows its super easy to mark up your helmets. My High school had blue helmets and I was a lineman and by the end of the season I could almost see every team we played. Thats what I think they where joking about. Like others have said that what the alerus center magic is every call goes their way.

[SteelSD]

What I found interesting was that after the play one of their OL charged him and knocked him (or someone else over) and was never flagged for it. In fact, we got an additional penalty for that... And yet a number of UND fans are bitching about the officiating.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

FIRST
EVERYTHING that happened immediately following the hit and beyond was WRONG and it is not, has NEVER BEEN, and will NEVER become, ANY part of what jackrabbit football/ or athletics in general are about!
that is all there is to say about that and i cannot imagine that ANYONE on this board would want to debate otherwise for even one second


But there does seem to be some debate about the hit itself. YES by the letter of the law it was targeting. he hit the receiver when the receiver was unable to protect himself. that is the ONLY reason this hit qualified as targeting.
HE DID NOT lead with his head
HE DID NOT contact the receiver above the shoulders
HE DID NOT launch himself

if there is another piece of this very questionable rule that i am missing. please add it. again i did not research this specifically before beginning. I am going off of what i remember and what i know after decades of coaching.

I AM SORRY but there should NOT BE ANY TIME during a football game when a player can NOT be hit. i DO NOT wish to see anyone get hurt!! but the absolute essence of football is that the players hit each other. (obviously i am talking about clean and legal hits!!!) saying that there is a time in a football game that a player cannot be hit is EXACTLY like saying that there is a time during a boxing match when one boxer cannot punch the other one in the face

A Thought: WHY are these hits completely the fault of the defense?

I will GUESS that there are stats available. but i can say with zero doubt that EASILY the biggest number of targeting hits, especially those that are the most brutal and most likely to cause injury, happen on ONE ROUTE!!

Deep Crossing Routes are without question the most dangerous. YES these hits can and do happen on other type of routes, but i GUARANTEE these are the most dangerous

therefore, WHY does the defense have to be penalized if the OC and the QB and the WR or other offensive player CHOOSE to attempt this route

i am sorry but if the offense CHOOSES to use these routes, the penalty for the defense for trying to stop them from being successful using these routes should be WAY WAY LESS

i will not speculate at this time what that would be but the defense should not carry all the blame and all the penalty

just something to throw out, NOT saying this should be the plan, but maybe something like if the QB throws a crossing route deeper than 7 yards and his receiver gets hit in a clean but dangerous way, why cant the QB get penalized? maybe he has to sit out the rest of that particular possession

anyway the jacks have had a LOT of these calls this year and they have paid a significant price, while also being shown, after extensive review to be doing this absolutely correct to the letter of the law on the majority of occasions!!

but since it has happened a lot, maybe it would be an interesting conversation for we fellow rabbit fans to have

OBVIOUSLY i am NOT saying that we will get these rules changed but the conversations that change the games we love have to begin somewhere

I honestly have a hard time figuring out the targeting rule, hits I think are targeting are permitted and hits I think are normal get flagged.

Honestly, you need to rewatch the play (about the 2:50 mark on ESPN+). Spalding lead with his head, his helmet clearly hit the ND player's helmet, and it looked to me like he launched (that's a little more subjective). And the receiver was defenseless.

It looked to me like a textbook example of why the rule exists in the first place, IMO.

Good call by the officials. I wouldn't be upset if Stig sat Spalding the entire game next week.

[jakejc795]

I honestly have a hard time figuring out the targeting rule, hits I think are targeting are permitted and hits I think are normal get flagged.

Honestly, you need to rewatch the play (about the 2:50 mark on ESPN+). Spalding lead with his head, his helmet clearly hit the ND player's helmet, and it looked to me like he launched (that's a little more subjective). And the receiver was defenseless.

It looked to me like a textbook example of why the rule exists in the first place, IMO.

Good call by the officials. I wouldn't be upset if Stig sat Spalding the entire game next week.

I was just going to post something like this, but I'd like to add the hit need not be "helmet-to-helmet" or even the crown on the helmet; forcible contact made to the head or neck area with shoulder, forearm, etc. could be considered targeting.

I'd gain even more respect for Stig if he benched Spalding, and that's not saying I think Spalding's a "problem" player. Part of it is sending a message that the behavior seen on TV is unacceptable and not indicative of Jacks' program or program principles.

[jakejc795]

What I found interesting was that after the play one of their OL charged him and knocked him (or someone else over) and was never flagged for it. In fact, we got an additional penalty for that... And yet a number of UND fans are bitching about the officiating.

I commented a couple times that I felt there should've been offsetting unsportsmanlikes, particularly when you compare Bryant's sprint and shoves to McCormick's play where he was penalized earlier

[LetsGoRabbits]

my thinking for this post was NOT to focus completely on this one play but it is obvious why it would be focused on

SF the receiver is defenseless because he is doing HIS JOB of trying to catch the ball. Graham is also doing his job of trying to stop the ball being caught and he is doing that within the context of a sport where foundationally the players hit each other

unless we want to change the fundamental idea of the game players are going to be hit. i NEVER want to see anyone injured. hit and pain those things happen. it is part of the game. but i am ALL FOR trying to reduce injuries to the greatest extent possible and i think the game has VERY OBVIOUSLY been made much much safer!! but it is still a game where the players hit each other

and when the team on offense CHOOSES to run, in this case, a play where the receiver runs 13 yards down the field and cuts completely across the field from his right to left, EVERYONE involved on the offensive side of the equation KNOWS that a defensive player is very likely going to put his shoulder into the receivers chest in order to stop him and it is not going to be pleasant and definitely not gentle

the offense MUST carry some responsibility for this!! OTHERWISE every team should run this play at will and say they MUST allow you to catch the ball or it will be a penalty

Also SF to your point, i did rewatch

i will concede the helmets did make contact
obviously for the refs these plays, all the plays, happen fast and can be difficult to say completely what happened and the angle of view makes a big difference

again, my point, was to discuss this rule in general, because THIS RULE is making defensive players look like they are dirty players and like they have questionable character, simply for doing their job. i do not know Graham but he is now being labled a dirty player and his character is being questioned because this normal football play has put him in the spotlight

NONE of us have any idea what he and his teammates were speaking about on the sideline, but the way some people are talking about it they were jumping up and down and celebrating wildly and telling each other that they hope the und receiver goes to the hospital or something


we can discuss the play but there is a bigger point, no matter what you think the details about helmets and where contact was made, Graham DID NOT attempt to do anything dirty!! he made a TOTALLY NORMAL football play

he did put his face in receiver face after the play and that deserved and received a penalty. and i have stated MANY times that is unacceptable, no matter what else was going on and no matter how excited you are about making a big hit!!!!

everything else and all the discussion about him being dirty
and the teammates who were speaking to him having NO CLASS
and as i have seen written other places, the sdsu football program has a culture problem and is filled with dirty classless individuals

is TOTALLY wrong and would NEVER have been discussed without this rule

but i understand the rule is there to PROTECT players and reduce the chances for serious injuries!!! but these hits and penalties and injuries occur far far far more often on this EXACT route

the offense CHOSE to run this route. the QB chose to throw the ball, LATE over the middle and deep, to a teammate running toward a defender running directly at him, the receiver chose to try to do his job and catch the ball

WHY is the defense and defensive player the only one carrying the responsibility and penalty for this?

the OC could choose NOT to run this play if HE CARES about his players safety
the QB could choose NOT to throw the pass if he CARES about his teammate safety
the WR could choose to see that there is a very good chance he is gonna get hit hard and let the ball go and protect himself if he CARES about his own safety

but the ONLY player who is supposed to NOT DO HIS JOB
the ONLY one who is supposed to prioritize the safety of someone on the OTHER team is the defensive player, in this case Graham

i am sorry but that is simply NOT an honest way to look at the world

in my view, yes helmets did hit
but graham CLEARLY was turning his left shoulder so that he would hit the WR in the chest with his shoulder. and HE DID DO THAT
while hitting the WR with his left shoulder THE SIDE of his helmet did hit the WR in the face

anyway there can be lots of discussion and lots of perspective about the details of the hit

but i saw a ndsu fan on another site saying that he clearly TRIED to hurt the und player. REALLY?? is that what anyone else saw?

anyway, again, i just think this rule has a VERY GOOD purpose!! but it is also not honest and the enforcement of it is definitely questionable
and i think it is ONE ROUTE that causes so so so much of the trouble
and i think the offense and offensive players need to share some of the responsibility for the safety of the receiver
and that when it is this particular route i think there needs to be some additional thinking about what is the best way to attempt to legislate safety

as far as this particular play, LIKE ANY SINGLE PLAY, there will be different perspectives and i am not sure how much value there is in thinking that anyone can make everyone or anyone else agree completely with their personal perspective! correct? or do some of you think you can get EVERYONE to see the same thing?

as far as Graham being dirty
or the teammates being dirty
or the program being whatever negative description somebody wants to use
I TOTALLY disagree but i do not expect to make everyone agree with me about that either

[LetsGoRabbits]

I commented a couple times that I felt there should've been offsetting unsportsmanlikes, particularly when you compare Bryant's sprint and shoves to McCormick's play where he was penalized earlier

AGAIN this fit the officiating of the entire game

T Kraft was penalized, as he SHOULD HAVE BEEN!!, for responding to the unacceptable actions of an opponent. BUT the opponent who initiated the problem received NO penalty
Graham was penalized for what appeared to be talking crap to an opponent after making a big hit. a und player responded to Graham's correctly penalized initiating behavior, but in this case the responding player and action were NOT penalized

in other words, the jacks were penalized at different times BOTH for initiating and for responding
while und was NEVER penalized for their equally wrong choices and behavior as either the player who initiated nor as the player who responded

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

my thinking for this post was NOT to focus completely on this one play but it is obvious why it would be focused on

SF the receiver is defenseless because he is doing HIS JOB of trying to catch the ball. Graham is also doing his job of trying to stop the ball being caught and he is doing that within the context of a sport where foundationally the players hit each other

unless we want to change the fundamental idea of the game players are going to be hit. i NEVER want to see anyone injured. hit and pain those things happen. it is part of the game. but i am ALL FOR trying to reduce injuries to the greatest extent possible and i think the game has VERY OBVIOUSLY been made much much safer!! but it is still a game where the players hit each other

and when the team on offense CHOOSES to run, in this case, a play where the receiver runs 13 yards down the field and cuts completely across the field from his right to left, EVERYONE involved on the offensive side of the equation KNOWS that a defensive player is very likely going to put his shoulder into the receivers chest in order to stop him and it is not going to be pleasant and definitely not gentle

the offense MUST carry some responsibility for this!! OTHERWISE every team should run this play at will and say they MUST allow you to catch the ball or it will be a penalty

Also SF to your point, i did rewatch

i will concede the helmets did make contact
obviously for the refs these plays, all the plays, happen fast and can be difficult to say completely what happened and the angle of view makes a big difference

again, my point, was to discuss this rule in general, because THIS RULE is making defensive players look like they are dirty players and like they have questionable character, simply for doing their job. i do not know Graham but he is now being labled a dirty player and his character is being questioned because this normal football play has put him in the spotlight

NONE of us have any idea what he and his teammates were speaking about on the sideline, but the way some people are talking about it they were jumping up and down and celebrating wildly and telling each other that they hope the und receiver goes to the hospital or something


we can discuss the play but there is a bigger point, no matter what you think the details about helmets and where contact was made, Graham DID NOT attempt to do anything dirty!! he made a TOTALLY NORMAL football play

he did put his face in receiver face after the play and that deserved and received a penalty. and i have stated MANY times that is unacceptable, no matter what else was going on and no matter how excited you are about making a big hit!!!!

everything else and all the discussion about him being dirty
and the teammates who were speaking to him having NO CLASS
and as i have seen written other places, the sdsu football program has a culture problem and is filled with dirty classless individuals

is TOTALLY wrong and would NEVER have been discussed without this rule

but i understand the rule is there to PROTECT players and reduce the chances for serious injuries!!! but these hits and penalties and injuries occur far far far more often on this EXACT route

the offense CHOSE to run this route. the QB chose to throw the ball, LATE over the middle and deep, to a teammate running toward a defender running directly at him, the receiver chose to try to do his job and catch the ball

WHY is the defense and defensive player the only one carrying the responsibility and penalty for this?

the OC could choose NOT to run this play if HE CARES about his players safety
the QB could choose NOT to throw the pass if he CARES about his teammate safety
the WR could choose to see that there is a very good chance he is gonna get hit hard and let the ball go and protect himself if he CARES about his own safety

but the ONLY player who is supposed to NOT DO HIS JOB
the ONLY one who is supposed to prioritize the safety of someone on the OTHER team is the defensive player, in this case Graham

i am sorry but that is simply NOT an honest way to look at the world

in my view, yes helmets did hit
but graham CLEARLY was turning his left shoulder so that he would hit the WR in the chest with his shoulder. and HE DID DO THAT
while hitting the WR with his left shoulder THE SIDE of his helmet did hit the WR in the face

anyway there can be lots of discussion and lots of perspective about the details of the hit

but i saw a ndsu fan on another site saying that he clearly TRIED to hurt the und player. REALLY?? is that what anyone else saw?

anyway, again, i just think this rule has a VERY GOOD purpose!! but it is also not honest and the enforcement of it is definitely questionable
and i think it is ONE ROUTE that causes so so so much of the trouble
and i think the offense and offensive players need to share some of the responsibility for the safety of the receiver
and that when it is this particular route i think there needs to be some additional thinking about what is the best way to attempt to legislate safety

as far as this particular play, LIKE ANY SINGLE PLAY, there will be different perspectives and i am not sure how much value there is in thinking that anyone can make everyone or anyone else agree completely with their personal perspective! correct? or do some of you think you can get EVERYONE to see the same thing?

as far as Graham being dirty
or the teammates being dirty
or the program being whatever negative description somebody wants to use
I TOTALLY disagree but i do not expect to make everyone agree with me about that either

I don't think Graham (or the team) is dirty, but his unsportsmanlike conduct after the tackle doesn't do him any favors. If it was a big hit and jog away, I don't think you would be seeing much discussion about the play or culture but I could be wrong. Similar tackles happen all the time at all levels of football without fanfare beyond the targeting penalty.

I also think the UND player who came in like a wrecking ball after the play should have been flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct.

FWIW, when I played football I dreamed of making a tackle like that.

[LetsGoRabbits]

I don't think Graham (or the team) is dirty, but his unsportsmanlike conduct after the tackle doesn't do him any favors. If it was a big hit and jog away, I don't think you would be seeing much discussion about the play or culture but I could be wrong. Similar tackles happen all the time at all levels of football without fanfare beyond the targeting penalty.

I also think the UND player who came in like a wrecking ball after the play should have been flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct.

FWIW, when I played football I dreamed of making a tackle like that.

i never thought YOU were saying he is dirty
but the CONSTANT review of these plays is what allowed the camera to focus on Graham
allowing EVERYONE to bring their own perspective into play regarding what was happening and what type of person he and his teammates are

i HOPE BY NOW i have made it clear i also TOTALLY disagree with his immediate response to the hit. but i also do not think that by itself would have caused a discussion about his character

i disagree with it!!!! but players pretty commonly do react to such plays. that was a pretty natural emotional response. NOT MAKING excuses or trying to accept it and i feel very sure he will learn from it and i would be very very shocked if we ever see something like that from him again

FWIW i am also not a fan of any other celebrations. TD dances and so on. i used to always ask my players do you know what my favorite TD dance is? players- what coach? me- hand the ball to the ref. at least pretend like you scored a TD before and get ready to do your job the next time

[jakejc795]

AGAIN this fit the officiating of the entire game

T Kraft was penalized, as he SHOULD HAVE BEEN!!, for responding to the unacceptable actions of an opponent. BUT the opponent who initiated the problem received NO penalty
Graham was penalized for what appeared to be talking crap to an opponent after making a big hit. a und player responded to Graham's correctly penalized initiating behavior, but in this case the responding player and action were NOT penalized

in other words, the jacks were penalized at different times BOTH for initiating and for responding
while und was NEVER penalized for their equally wrong choices and behavior as either the player who initiated nor as the player who responded

Yes, we clearly agree on the officiating, if not on whether Spalding should've been flagged for targeting.

We also agree re. Spalding being a "dirty" or classless player, but I'll concede to having a marked pro-Jacks bias

[SDSUAlum08]

His reply on Twitter was terrible. Just STFU and move on. The kid made a mistake in a heated game but replying to anything just makes it worse….Plus his apology was horrendous.

[LetsGoRabbits]

Yes, we clearly agree on the officiating, if not on whether Spalding should've been flagged for targeting.

We also agree re. Spalding being a "dirty" or classless player, but I'll concede to having a marked pro-Jacks bias

i TOTALLY agree that according to the rule, he DEFINITELY should have been flagged for targeting

he absolutely did hit the receiver when the receiver did not have the ability to defend himself

BUT THAT also assumes WE AGREE that the WR could not defend himself because he is expected to do his job of trying to catch the ball

i think where we have a very rare disagreement is that you are ok with this rule under these circumstances and i am not.

This exact play, in my opinion, is the MOST HIGH RISK play that remains in the game of football. it is the play where a player is the most likely to get injured even after a clean hit or tackle is made. (obviously there is PLENTY of debate about if graham's hit was clean or not, besides the wr being defenseless)

coaches and players have done a very very good job of teaching/ learning to keep the head UP. that has greatly decreased the chance for serious injury. you still get big hits if a LB or safety meets an RB directly in the hole with little room for maneuvering but as long as nobody puts their head down, somebody maybe comes away with a bit of pain but very rarely an injury

i could list a bunch of other potentially risky scenarios where the risk has been hugely if not completely removed

but this scenario with a WR (or other receiver) coming from one side of the field and a defender from the other and they are running directly at each other in opposite directions with the WR looking at the ball and not at the field in front of him carries great risk. and i just do not think it is honest to EASILY and WILLINGLY tell offensive coaches and players that they can CHOOSE to run these routes and that all of the responsibility for the WR safety falls on the defense

i guess we will see where the conversation goes. maybe nobody else sees what i am saying and / or i look like a bigger idiot than usual

[jakejc795]

i TOTALLY agree that according to the rule, he DEFINITELY should have been flagged for targeting

he absolutely did hit the receiver when the receiver did not have the ability to defend himself

BUT THAT also assumes WE AGREE that the WR could not defend himself because he is expected to do his job of trying to catch the ball

i think where we have a very rare disagreement is that you are ok with this rule under these circumstances and i am not.

This exact play, in my opinion, is the MOST HIGH RISK play that remains in the game of football. it is the play where a player is the most likely to get injured even after a clean hit or tackle is made. (obviously there is PLENTY of debate about if graham's hit was clean or not, besides the wr being defenseless)

coaches and players have done a very very good job of teaching/ learning to keep the head UP. that has greatly decreased the chance for serious injury. you still get big hits if a LB or safety meets an RB directly in the hole with little room for maneuvering but as long as nobody puts their head down, somebody maybe comes away with a bit of pain but very rarely an injury

i could list a bunch of other potentially risky scenarios where the risk has been hugely if not completely removed

but this scenario with a WR (or other receiver) coming from one side of the field and a defender from the other and they are running directly at each other in opposite directions with the WR looking at the ball and not at the field in front of him carries great risk. and i just do not think it is honest to EASILY and WILLINGLY tell offensive coaches and players that they can CHOOSE to run these routes and that all of the responsibility for the WR safety falls on the defense

i guess we will see where the conversation goes. maybe nobody else sees what i am saying and / or i look like a bigger idiot than usual

I see what you're saying, and I agree that Schuster and the OC could be seen as contributing to Caden Dennis's injury. I just don't think that absolves Spalding.

I also hope that we can recognize that poor form was exhibited on the tackle (head not up, no effort to wrap up, etc.) once everyone's cooled off. Failure to do so leaves Jacks needlessly susceptible to injuries of their own

[LetsGoRabbits]

I see what you're saying, and I agree that Schuster and the OC could be seen as contributing to Caden Dennis's injury. I just don't think that absolves Spalding.

I also hope that we can recognize that poor form was exhibited on the tackle (head not up, no effort to wrap up, etc.) once everyone's cooled off. Failure to do so leaves Jacks needlessly susceptible to injuries of their own

Yes i think there is agreement this is not a training film perfect tackle. definitely no effort to wrap up

i am curious. WHO here believes that his intent was to hit the player in the head or the neck or to attempt to injure the WR? i think some Non Jacks fans seem to have that point of view. do some of us here share that?

i absolutely DO NOT believe that. i have little interest in debating each point of the tackle and what was good and bad. but TRUE it was not a perfect tackle. i would be interested how many of those ever actually occur in a game. i would say very very few

not that players cannot try and i am a big BIG fan of wrapping up!! but it is very hard to simulate live tackling with practice tackling and the other guy really never cooperates


anyway i agree NOT a textbook tackle
i TOTALLY DISAGREE a malicious tackle or any intent to injure

i have looked at the play 50 times. graham does clearly turn his body to attempt delivering the blow with his shoulder and not his head. if you lean forward at all, which you do when you tackle, it is pretty impossible to keep the head from making contact

his head could be up more YES
does he hit with the crown of his helmet or the front or facemask? absolutely not, the left earhole of his helmet makes contact with the WR left jaw

is the helmet the first thing to make contact?? what you see really depends on where you were standing, but very possibly YES, but it is close and in real time contact with his left shoulder and the left side of his head against the WR are basically instantaneous

i believe his CLEAR INTENT is to make contact with his shoulder. and his shoulder hits the WR in the chest. his shoulder is clearly NOT aimed at the neck or head

the contact with his head is, STILL A FOUL, but i do believe the head contact is incidental. his plan is to hit with his left shoulder and his left shoulder goes into the body, NOT the head or neck

when you look at the replay from the offensive end of the field, you see the left shoulder and side of the WR and you see the numbers on the front of graham shirt and the buckle of his pants. WHY do i say this? because it shows him CLEARLY turning his body to initiate contact with his shoulder

and someone said in their view he did launch. his feet NEVER leave the ground other than a normal running pattern

WELL i guess now i have done what i said i did not want to do and stated HOW i see the hit. others will disagree that is fine. i have no belief that i can make everyone see what i see