That’s 100 % targeting
- Thread starter edub72
- Start date
Hit with face mask. Not crown of helmet. I think that's why they didn't call it.
I've been listening to the game the game on the radio, with the ASU announcers going ballistic.
They have been a good yet comical group.
They have been a good yet comical group.
This was a total bs call. Targetting for sure
Aren’t these announcing teams supposed to have a firmer ref on call to get an opinion? wtf happened ? Announcers went in a black hole Terrible announcers. ASU got screeed. Fuk Texas
Oil $$$ is a real thing! Only reason that call wasn't made!!
$EC $$. Their bag man finally made it to the game, LOL!!!!!!!
....ever since the no call when Torii Hunter, Jr. got blown up in the end zone against Texas several years ago, I don't know what targeting is.....
Targeting isn’t confined to hitting with the crown of the helmet
Here are the rules regarding targeting
The NCAA's targeting rule in college football prohibits players from making forcible contact with an opponent that goes beyond a legal tackle or block. This includes:
- Leading with the crown of the helmet
- Making forcible contact with the head or neck of a defenseless opponent
- Using the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow, or shoulder to make forcible contact with the head or neck of a defenseless opponent
Last edited:
Yeah, that play was egregious.
That one today was more difficult to call in my opinion. It was bang-bang. The guy caught the ball and the defender hit him. I always thought there was supposed to be some intentional aspect to it. I just think their heads collided.
If that wasn't targeting, then there is no such thing as targeting!
I'm not trying to argue because I find the rule difficult to understand. But I thought there was some requirement that the defender had to launch himself (i.e., "target") at the other player. To me, that play looked like there was no time to avoid hitting him.
Its open to interpretation I guess. Do you remember S. Tuitt's targeting call when it was against I think Pitt and Tuitt was engaged with a lineman falling down and his helmet just happened to hit the QB's head. Most ridiculous call ever.
I remember the Tuitt call and the non-call on Hunter. I'm pretty certain that same year a Virginia Tech player hit Kizer right in the face with the crown of his helmet as he was trying to slide on ND's last possession. Kizer had to leave the field for a play or two and any chance of a last-second victory went with him.
The refs had to make up for Sark's coaching ineptitude. Texas has a lot of talent though. Gotta say OSU is the team to beat.
What exactly is meant by 'intent'? Anyone even possibly guilty of targeting is definitely intending to deliver a blow, unless it was totally incidental contact and when does that happen? If they mean totally intending to target, as such, and the brutal helmet to helmet hit they delivered is what they intended to deliver, then this play would totally qualify I would think. He wasn't clearly aiming for his chest, and then just misjudged. It was square and direct contact.
And that same official called the egregious “pick” call against FSU
Doesn't have to be crown of the helmet. Defenseless players + direct contact to the head and neck area is targeting. This was targeting 100%
Surprised no one is mentioning the offensive lineman illegally pulling Skattebo into the end zone. The official was staring right at it. You can push, illegal to pull.
Nothing. I thought it was another no call worthy of discussion. A thousand pardons of my perceived error in judgment.
And the collision resulted in the receiver being injured, lying on the field.
It’s beyond comprehendible that targeting wasn’t called especially after the review
Chances are ASU wins that game if the right call was made
I thought the O-lineman pulled him sideways and then pushed him in. The on field refs might just have been out of position to see that play. And I don't think the guys in the booth can call a penalty that was not called on the field.
Not renewable at all. From the end zone shot I thought he clearly pulled him in. Just something I noticed. Either the game announcers or afterwards on the post game it was mentioned.
Every analyst I mean every analyst has side it was clear cut targeting
I actually thought the hit on the Texas receiver on the interception could have been too. Sure looked to me he got hit primarily in the neck area the way his head snapped back. Sloppy game, lots of penalties called and not called. Texas O line had numerous pre snap issues. Fortunate to win.
It's just that it was such a critical juncture of the game, it was so blatantly targeting, practically knocked the guy out, they had unlimited time to review with the game paused while the player attempted to recover from this blatant head shot he just took. And the refs very quickly said No Targeting, Texas wins, or we hope they do.
So I guess maybe they should have called it on ASU too if they were guilty of it in some other instance. But it's almost as if the football gods were like, waiting for the refs to call it, no possible excuse, almost daring the refs not to call this super blatant targeting call and do their jobs as officials even though it's a critical juncture of the game and it very well may lead to ASU finishing off a great comeback and knocking Texas out. And the refs were like, F U god, we're not calling it, what are you going to do about it? That's right, bitch, we're not calling it, and Texas wins, at least if we have anything to say about it. That's how egregious it was.
So I guess maybe they should have called it on ASU too if they were guilty of it in some other instance. But it's almost as if the football gods were like, waiting for the refs to call it, no possible excuse, almost daring the refs not to call this super blatant targeting call and do their jobs as officials even though it's a critical juncture of the game and it very well may lead to ASU finishing off a great comeback and knocking Texas out. And the refs were like, F U god, we're not calling it, what are you going to do about it? That's right, bitch, we're not calling it, and Texas wins, at least if we have anything to say about it. That's how egregious it was.
My GUESS is that the non-decision was made because they didn’t want that call to influence the outcome of the game, when that’s exactly what happened by them not making the call
This is was one of the most absurd pseudo-logical bits of tripe I've ever heard, even from a blatant troll, who live off of being deliberately argumentative, and the more stupid and insulting and nonsensical the better. But you did say you were guessing.
Letting players get away with a penalty that obvious, is essentially like saying, whenever it suits us, and for our convenience, we're going to suspend our duties as referees, and for brief periods of the game when we as refs impulsively and capriciously decide, there will be anarchy on the football field, and we just won't make calls. It's open season. And then, later, like the very next play quite possibly, we will enforce the rules, just because that's the mood we were in in that moment, and it is our job of course. And as refs we are almost like slaves to this wayward impulse, and it's just going to happen whenever it happens.
But it's all for the good of the sport because we don't want to affect the outcome of the game even though our only purpose for existing is to the affect the outcome of the game. And there will be random moments when we decide to renounce and abandon those duties, under the ethical guise of, again, the good of the sport. Whenever we suddenly decide. And Texas wins....
