Targeting

[Born N Bled Red]

1st half screen to Newby, tackler blew it up, made head to head contact, similar to what Gerry has been ejected forultiple times. No flag. Explanation?

[MichiganDad3]

Worst rule in the history of sports

[Count 'Bility]

Worst rule in the history of sports

i dont think its a bad rule. I think its good and needed. But the application and interpretation is so stinkin bad. I mean. At what point is simple common sense too much to ask.

[drfish]

Anyone see the Penn State secondary player that got called for targeting that was clearly going for the ball. His shoulder made contact with the receiver's facemask, but he was clearly trying to pick off the ball. Horrible call and worse it was "confirmed" by the replay booth.

[Elf]

Anyone see the Penn State secondary player that got called for targeting that was clearly going for the ball. His shoulder made contact with the receiver's facemask, but he was clearly trying to pick off the ball. Horrible call and worse it was "confirmed" by the replay booth.

I saw that, absolutely ludicrous. I understand and agree with the need to protect players from head injuries to the greatest extent possible but some of these calls are getting pretty lame.

[Moiraine]

The purpose of an ejection is to teach the player (and future players who might commit the same act) a lesson - to not do it again.

 

Where this targeting ejection stuff gets it wrong is on plays like the Penn State one. The player didn't do anything wrong that he needs to be taught a lesson about. He was going for the interception. The Michigan player's head happened to be in the way of his shoulder pad. That kind of play should not result in an ejection. Honestly, it shouldn't even be a penalty, but I'm okay with it remaining one. In fact on that kind of play the penalty should go both ways, against the offensive and against the defensive player.

 

Since the reason you eject someone is to teach them a lesson, the intent should be considered before ejecting them. If it's obvious they're going for the ball or a quarterback was ducking out of the way and the player couldn't stop himself mid-launch, it should not be an ejection. Only a penalty.

[shyndy]

Then in the ucla Stanford game a ucla guy did what looked like targeting to me, totally led with the helmet and looked like a "headhunter" type play, knocked the Stanford guy out of the game. Officials review the play and say " there is no penalty for targeting, the player caught the ball and fumbled. The play results in an interception, first down". Just cracked me up that on top of what else they got wrong they said interception when it was a fumble recovery.

[NU5XChamps]

I don't blame the Ref's on the field. They are throwing the flags for safety reasons. The PSU play was a bang bang play. However, it is the replay official that drives me nuts. The PSU play was the worst call ever. The player was CLEARLY going for the ball. They need to fix this because it is costing players time. He was lucky it happened in the 1st half, because if not, he would have to sit out another game, if I recall correctly.

[drfish]

Yeah, they have to sit for two halves. So if it is in the 2nd half of one game, they sit the 1st half of the next.

[mwj98]

Tell you what, I was watching that Florida/Tennessee game when that florida player got ejected for throwing a punch. Once that tape is reviewed, the SEC should give that kid an apology for being throw out. Terrible

[huKSer]

Yeah, they have to sit for two halves. So if it is in the 2nd half of one game, they sit the 1st half of the next.

They sit for the rest of the half and the entire next half.

 

Which means anywhere from 31 minutes to 59 minutes depending on when the foul occured.

[IlliniHusker]

Targeting Rule - I think the BIG 10 refs are calling it every time 2 helmets make contact. Whether or not it was deliberate or they were both trying to catch a pass or whether one player slipped / tripped ... makes no difference.

Other conferences like the Pac 12 (Stanford / UCLA game) or SEC (Tenn / Ga) pretty much ignore targeting altogether.

Best solution is to require the reviewing booth to ACTIVELY CONFIRM OR DENY THE CALL. if the booth ignores their role in the penalty, the conference should fire them!

[RunMickeyRun02]

Every time targeting is call the sport of football dies a little.

[drfish]

 

Yeah, they have to sit for two halves. So if it is in the 2nd half of one game, they sit the 1st half of the next.

They sit for the rest of the half and the entire next half.

 

Which means anywhere from 31 minutes to 59 minutes depending on when the foul occured.

 

I believe I just said that. Nice avatar BTW.

[huKSer]

 

 

Yeah, they have to sit for two halves. So if it is in the 2nd half of one game, they sit the 1st half of the next.

They sit for the rest of the half and the entire next half.

 

Which means anywhere from 31 minutes to 59 minutes depending on when the foul occured.

 

I believe I just said that. Nice avatar BTW.

 

My point is targeting is not evenly called but the penalty is uneven, too. Maybe make it 30 minutes of game time. If the player is ejected at 9:37 in the third, the player can reenter at 9:37 in the 1st of the next game.