The targeting rule is theory and is difficult to apply to a fluid game. How often have you watched a replay of a targeting call and noticed that the defender had left his feet when the receiver went up for the ball, and would have struck receiver in the numbers or lower, but for the receiver falling down with the momentum of the catch.How did they miss the targeting call when Quick got knocked out? The uk dude lunged from 5 yards away right at his head, that is the type of hit that the rule is trying to prevent.
Neared the ground? He had taken two steps. Intent has nothing to do with it being targeting or not.The targeting rule is theory and is difficult to apply to a fluid game. How often have you watched a replay of a targeting call and noticed that the defender had left his feet when the receiver went up for the ball, and would have struck receiver in the numbers or lower, but for the receiver falling down with the momentum of the catch.
In the Quick situation he had leaped high (like he had on his previous TD) to catch the ball. The UK defender appeared to react instinctively to that action but hit Quick when he neared the ground. Considering the UK player got wiped out as well Quick, I doubt that the hit that occurred was planned.
Neared the ground? He had taken two steps. Intent has nothing to do with it being targeting or not.
I think if Quick had taken 2 steps it would have been a touchdown since I believe he was in the end zone when he caught it.Neared the ground? He had taken two steps. Intent has nothing to do with it being targeting or not.