How in the hell can targeting be called last week vs Abdul Carter, but the missle launch, intentional spear today by the Ohio LB not be called targeting. What a BS mess that is
Targeting: Abdul Carter vs today’s
- Thread starter SurgeOne
- Start date
With each passing season the targeting calls (and reversals) become more subjective depending on the conference affiliation of the officiating crew.
seems very inconsistent between the two. I assume the crew today would not have ejected Abdul last week. Did anyone ask JF about what the ref's explanation was to him? It looked like they tried to explain it to him, not that he was buying it.
Targeting or not, to me it was a dirty play. The announcers didn't use that word but came close calling it "completely unnecessary". He deserved to get ejected and I think he should have been by rule.
I know. Makes no sense that Abdul Carter’s was targeting, but that isn’t. I swear we end up on the wrong end of those mis-calls waaay too muchI think I just saw Levis get his bread ripped off by Florida and targeting was overruled
I thought that was a good hit…that’s the way it should be called. No launching and no crown of the helmet. A hard hit isn’t always an illegal hit.I think I just saw Levis get his bread ripped off by Florida and targeting was overruled
I know the rules are crazy but straight to (and literally) right thru the head - I just don’t understand it
If there was definitive evidence the guy made contact with his helmet, then doesn’t that also mean there was no evidence that he didn’t? In that case, don’t they just stick with the call on the field? Or does the review need to show definitive proof of targeting?
I hate that football has gone to the level of minutia in replays. Just play football and make calls in the field.
I believe targeting is simply reviewed and determined yea or nay. Call on the field doesn't matter, they are just looking to see if the criteria for targeting is met.
He was heading toward his chest and Levis looked down which caused the defender to hit the bottom of his face mask. The helmet came off when the defender landed on him and slid over top of him.
More than head butted him. He lowered his head and launched himself towards Allar’s head and made contact with Allar’s head with the crown of his helmet. Was this a MAC or BIG crew? Also, Washington scored on that pass play and they called a crack back block on a legal block on Parker’s long pass/run down the sidelines.
Last edited:
They said on the broadcast that the targeting rule changed from last year - now facemask and 6 inches above it, no more side of helmet. Which makes me think they got last week's ruling wrong.
I suppose Carter received the targeting call for two reasons. Because BIG refs are incompetent and they are still angry that PSU joined the conference.
I thought the crew really missed the targeting call yesterday, as it seemed like a pretty clear one that checked all of the boxes fir targeting.
However, I thought the blindside block was the correct call, and pretty consistent with how I saw it called in other games throughout the day…it’s a play (the blocking downfield back towards your own end zone) that they’re really trying to remove from the game.
That wasn't a blind side block. The guy had plenty of time to see the blocker coming at him. BS call.
...but the Gators lost!!!I think I just saw Levis get his bread ripped off by Florida and targeting was overruled
This post is toast.I think I just saw Levis get his bread ripped off by Florida and targeting was overruled
Obviously an unpopular opinion...but these days, they are calling that every time, as you basically can't throw any blocks back upfield with any sort of force.
In fairness, I don’t think he was going for the ball. I think if he had he wouldn’t have been called. I think he went for the hit to keep the guy from getting to the ball, which I’m fine with.
True....so did the refs simply blow the call or do you believe, as some do, that the refs had some bias against PSU?
I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I think the refs just blew the call, as they seemingly do in every game I watch every week. Like I said, I think it was the fact that he went for the hit instead of the ball that got him tossed. I don’t think it was the uniform he was wearing.
I agree. ...But there are definitely some on this board that believe there is some conspiracy against Penn State by the BIG. It's ridiculous.
I don’t really have time for that. Have there beensome calls that made me question the integrity of a ref here or there (heel-toe, for instance)? Sure. But overall, I think they just miss some calls. And I don’t know that the officials would be particularly skewed towards Purdue for some reason in the targeting instance.
Last edited:
