So was that targeting or not?
- Thread starter TheRealVille
- Start date
Cards getting hosed by the refs. Everyone should watch this game when Cards fans complain about the obvious bias against them. Look at the Wake Forest game last season.
For whatever reason, Louisville football is a constant victim of bad officiating.
For whatever reason, Louisville football is a constant victim of bad officiating.
Targeting is totally subjective with vague criteria.
Not to mention over aggressive penalties.
I said “no targeting” from jump and my wife thought I was crazy. It was the “side/back” of the defender’s helmet. Not the “crown”. He was turning his head, not “launching”.
“IF” they are serious about it, eliminate ANY “headshot”.
AND penalize ball carriers who duck their heads. THAT is targeting to a T.
But no, they just want to “appear” warm and fuzzy with arbitrary, game changing decisions.
Not to mention over aggressive penalties.
I said “no targeting” from jump and my wife thought I was crazy. It was the “side/back” of the defender’s helmet. Not the “crown”. He was turning his head, not “launching”.
“IF” they are serious about it, eliminate ANY “headshot”.
AND penalize ball carriers who duck their heads. THAT is targeting to a T.
But no, they just want to “appear” warm and fuzzy with arbitrary, game changing decisions.
The flag came because the Cards receiver was hit in the head. If it would just had been called unnecessary roughness instead of targeting, the penalty would have stayed and there wouldn't have been a review.
I watch a lot of college football and I have seen a lot less called targeting. There's a reason all the announcers thought it was targeting and it's not because they're UofL hacks. They seen a lot less called targeting.
I watch a lot of college football and I have seen a lot less called targeting. There's a reason all the announcers thought it was targeting and it's not because they're UofL hacks. They seen a lot less called targeting.
I 100% thought it fit definition - I’d say he launched and make forceable contact with the head.
It was definitely targeting he was hit in the head and he was defenseless they got the call wrong. Those refs should be called on the carpet for missing that call, it is there to protect the players.
And this is why it is such a subjective call.
Different review officials see it as differently as we do.
IF they're serious, ban ALL head hits.
I believe that whenever the initial contact is helmet to helmet, it qualifies as targeting. The term “intentional” is seldom obvious and there is where the ambiguity begins.
Yes, there was nothing in the video replay to reverse the “in real time“ call.
Yes, there was nothing in the video replay to reverse the “in real time“ call.
Had Malik thrown it sooner it wouldn’t had even happened.
As he should’ve thrown it sooner on the 4th down bootleg in the 4th!
As he should’ve thrown it sooner on the 4th down bootleg in the 4th!
Sure looked like he "launched" to me, and the helmet to helmet contact clearly spun the receivers head around.
Definitely targeting.. he hit him helmet to helmet and damn near tore his head off. His head spun 90 degrees on contact.
So it's safe to say there is no logical reason why on replay review the penalty was overturned? No explanation from the ACC on why?
We won but UofL shouldn't let this go. There needs to be an explanation because not one person on TV or online has seen it and said it wasn't targeting.
We won but UofL shouldn't let this go. There needs to be an explanation because not one person on TV or online has seen it and said it wasn't targeting.
“What’s targeting?” is almost like “what’s a catch?” The rules are so complicated and lawyerly that they have to look at 10 minutes of replay and still can’t figure it out. I wish they’d simplify the rules, get rid of replay, and just go with the call on the field. It’s sports, not life and death here.
by the way, that was targeting.
by the way, that was targeting.
It's really not that complicated. Leading with the helmet and making helmet to helmet contact.
Then why do they get so many wrong? And given where the head is located on the body, it’s kind of hard not to lead with the head.