Started By
Message
Should targeting not be called on the field and let the replay officials decide?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:08 pm
The field refs can throw the flag for unnecessary roughness, late hit, etc. So there would at least be the 15 yard penalty. But once they also declare targeting on the field then there has to be indisputable evidence to overturn it by the replay reviewers. Anything close and the call will stand. The replay reviewers would have the advantage of different camera angles and slow motion to make the right decision if it is targeting or not.
The rule is so ambiguous that it is difficult for the referees to make the right call at full speed and may not have the best vantage point. And you would hope that there would be consistency since it is the same replay reviewers making the decisions and not different referee crews.
The rule is so ambiguous that it is difficult for the referees to make the right call at full speed and may not have the best vantage point. And you would hope that there would be consistency since it is the same replay reviewers making the decisions and not different referee crews.
9
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:09 pm to gumbeaux
quote:
The rule is so ambiguous that it is difficult for the referees to make the right call at full speed and may not have the best vantage point.
that's why every targeting call is reviewed by the replay officials
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:12 pm to gumbeaux
Difficult for the replay booth as well...
Exhibit A: this past weekend.
Exhibit A: this past weekend.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:16 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:17 pm to lsufball19
quote:
that's why every targeting call is reviewed by the replay officials
I understand that....but my point is if the referees declare targeting on the field then there will be times where the replay team won’t overturn it if the hit was debatable. Let the replay officials decide without having to overturn a call made on the field.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:18 pm to gumbeaux
I think the US Supreme Court be used for every targeting ruling in every game every Saturday.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:18 pm to BayouCowboy
quote:Why did you edit to take out "that removes bias"?
national level review.
It was a bad call but this bias bullshite is beyond stupid, even for LSU fans...
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:20 pm to gumbeaux
quote:
but my point is if the referees declare targeting on the field then there will be times where the replay team won’t overturn it if the hit was debatable
Because the rule says "when in doubt, it is a foul"
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:20 pm to gumbeaux
no it should be called when It happens and you people need to get over it and move on....this one player was not going to be the difference in the Alabama game. They are going to beat y'all.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:21 pm to gumbeaux
You would think that since targeting calls are reviewed and can impact multiple games that they would take their time to get them right. I think that was the spirit of the rule. Now that we have a good example, the SEC needs to take it to Indianapolis, and offer an alternative plan. To where if it is a bad call, then the player does not have to serve the second part of the suspension. At least this way, a wrong can be partially righted. The bottom line is that the rule is dumb and can not stand as is for very long.
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:21 pm to gumbeaux
I dont hate this
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:23 pm to gumbeaux
quote:
Should targeting not be called on the field and let the replay officials decide?
They should let the offices in Baton rouge decide...
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:29 pm to Jma313
quote:
no it should be called when It happens and you people need to get over it and move on....this one player was not going to be the difference in the Alabama game. They are going to beat y'all.
Did I mention anything about Devin White and that his presence will win the game vs. Bama? No I didn’t. Everyone is in agreement on this site and around the country that the enforcement of the targeting rule is inconsistent. The Devin White call has brought this to a flashpoint. I am only suggesting a method to gain consistency.
You must still be butt hurt and melting over MSU’s loss to LSU to make a post like that.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:34 pm to gumbeaux
I think there should be a requirement that the 'forcible contact' should be enough to knock the other player down.
Renfro Targeting
Renfro Targeting
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:41 pm to Realistic Ag
i think what Mike P was suggesting was that if there is not clear evidence on replay, then you shouldn't uphold the targeting call. i think that's reasonable, honestly.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:48 pm to Realistic Ag
the only ways to take helmet to helmet hits out of the game is to do away with helmets or go to drop kick tackling.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:54 pm to gumbeaux
quote:
Let the replay officials decide without having to overturn a call made on the field.
that happens too when the call isn't made on the field. Happened in the Auburn/UT game 2 weeks ago. Officials on the field didn't make the call but the replay center signaled for them to stop the game to review the play. Happened in our game against Miami as well. The rule also says, when in doubt, it's a foul. It's not the same standard of review as other replay reviews of "indisputable video evidence"
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 10/23/18 at 12:58 pm to viceman
quote:
You would think that since targeting calls are reviewed and can impact multiple games that they would take their time to get them right. I think that was the spirit of the rule. Now that we have a good example, the SEC needs to take it to Indianapolis, and offer an alternative plan. To where if it is a bad call, then the player does not have to serve the second part of the suspension. At least this way, a wrong can be partially righted. The bottom line is that the rule is dumb and can not stand as is for very long.
My thoughts exactly. Nothing can or will be done about White, but this could serve as the impetus to change a bad rule. Anytime a player is suspended for an on the field penalty, there should be an in depth review on Monday to determine whether that player sits the next game.
It should be the right call, not the fast call.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:02 pm to lsufball19
quote:
The rule also says, when in doubt, it's a foul. It's not the same standard of review as other replay reviews of "indisputable video evidence"
This is inherently the problem in a nutshell.
Targeting 1/2 like a Flagrant in basketball would make a lot more sense, where barrier to Targeting 1 is the above standard, Targeting 2 is more of an evaluation of the play holistically... not so much "indisputable evidence" but just in context, did it look like a football play where helmets made contact or did it look like someone trying to make contact while also making a play... If the fear is that it's too light of a penalty, then make Targeting 2 a removal from three halves of play... ie. happens in first half, miss half of next game. happens in second half, miss all of the next game.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:10 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
This is inherently the problem in a nutshell.
No disagreement from me. I think it is a very poorly drafted rule that is far too broad and ambiguous which is probably why we hear so many different interpretations of the same rule. I think even the officials are unsure of what is or isn't targeting. And if an ambiguous rule results in a suspension of the guilty party, then clearly the NCAA needs to convene in the offseason about modifying the rule so everyone is clear on how it should operate. IMO, they need to have two levels of targeting, one for incidental targeting and one for egregious targeting. For the incidental targeting, you get a 15 yard penalty. If you get two of those in one game, then you're ejected. Egregious targeting with clear intent, ejection would be appropriate; however, all ejections that come with a suspension in the next game should also provide for a mandatory review the following week by a neutral body from another conference or something to that extent.
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 1:14 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News