Proof targeting is a subjective penalty that shouldn't result in game disqualification

[Quest4Twelve]

Watch this hit by MTSU against the Bama player. Targeting is initially called but reversed by the booth.

Is this targeting

 

[THUNDERSTRUCK111]

Speaking of targeting. How long is Antonio carter out for. Just the first half ?
That hit on Devon ford was clearly targeting. No call but they call it on our guy.

 

[FightingIrish44]

Perhaps they took the penalty away because #34 for Bama blocked the guy into the tackle? It was actually an illegal block in the back as well.

 

[HDK]

Speaking of targeting. How long is Antonio carter out for. Just the first half ?
That hit on Devon ford was clearly targeting. No call but they call it on our guy.

I read that he won't miss any time because the foul occurred in the first half.

I also thought the hit on Ford was targeting. Interesting, though, I also read where Freeman agreed with both calls.

 

[Pennick4]

All calls are subjective.

 

[tbonesays]

All calls are subjective.

But only targeting requires a team of lawyers.

 

[Tru2Irish]

I thought the whole purpose was to limit head injuries/concussions. So why should it be subjective? The only instance is if a player aims lower but bounces or is shoved into another player's helmet. Why is it limited to the crown of the helmet if the front of the helmet also causes concussion protocols? Makes no sense.

 

[Golson5]

Getting ejected is a ridiculous rule

 

[ftnfan62]

I like erroring on the side of caution to get this fixed long term. I dont agree with the game suspension because some of these truly are targetting, where the player intentionally "targets". Most of these now are becoming "accidental". Someone twists at the last minute, its bang bang, its shoulder first.

I would like them to rule on minor and major. Minor is a 5 minute runoff, major is 15 minutes. Seems enough.

 

[alpha08]

I thought the whole purpose was to limit head injuries/concussions. So why should it be subjective? The only instance is if a player aims lower but bounces or is shoved into another player's helmet. Why is it limited to the crown of the helmet if the front of the helmet also causes concussion protocols? Makes no sense.

The crown of the helmet is relevant in large part because it protects the player actually delivering the blow. Ducking your head for a big hit is dangerous for the tackler due to axial loading on the cervical spine, and is much more dangerous than looking up. Hence the tackling tip of "seeing what you hit" or "heads up football" as established by the NFL in recent years. Both of these teaching points are designed to protect the tackler in a collision situation. "See what you hit" is bar none, the most important safety tip you can teach any young football player.