Started By
Message
re: Should targeting not be called on the field and let the replay officials decide?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:13 pm to ibldprplgld
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:13 pm to ibldprplgld
quote:
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.
Correct, and if it can happen to one of us, then it could happen to any of us. So this is bigger than White, LSU, or even the SEC itself. We may be stuck with it for this year but it can be corrected by next year. I hate it for White, I really do, but he could have a longer lasting effect on college football than any other player this year.
1
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:16 pm to viceman
quote:
Correct, and if it can happen to one of us, then it could happen to any of us. So this is bigger than White, LSU, or even the SEC itself. We may be stuck with it for this year but it can be corrected by next year. I hate it for White, I really do, but he could have a longer lasting effect on college football than any other player this year.
It was only a matter of time before a big-time player was suspended and/or ejected from a big-time game due to the targeting penalty. I knew the reaction from whoever was affected would be big, just hate that it happened to be LSU. But hopefully this shows the NCAA that they really need to address how this rule is implemented and governed.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:27 pm to lsufball19
quote:
It was only a matter of time before a big-time player was suspended and/or ejected from a big-time game due to the targeting penalty. I knew the reaction from whoever was affected would be big, just hate that it happened to be LSU. But hopefully this shows the NCAA that they really need to address how this rule is implemented and governed.
And honestly, the NCAA should be open to being more responsive to appeals for review of their rules throughout the season in cases where a rule has been clearly misapplied.
Letting it stand just because there's no appeals process is just as bad as the way it's written.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:30 pm to ibldprplgld
quote:
And honestly, the NCAA should be open to being more responsive to appeals for review of their rules throughout the season in cases where a rule has been clearly misapplied.
It wasn’t misapplied here though. By definition White’s hit WAS targeting and it’s already been reviewed and upheld by the league office. It certainly wasn’t a horrific hit, and prior to the rule it would have just been a roughing the passer foul, but as of 2016 it was now a targeting foul.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:32 pm to lsufball19
quote:
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.
Seems pretty reasonable. I just think that if you go that route, all ejections should be reviewed (first or second half) and the penalty should be higher for that level of review if upheld...
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:35 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Seems pretty reasonable. I just think that if you go that route, all ejections should be reviewed (first or second half) and the penalty should be higher for that level of review if upheld...
that would be a better way of going about it, no doubt
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:46 pm to droliver
quote:
It wasn’t misapplied here though. By definition White’s hit WAS targeting and it’s already been reviewed and upheld by the league office. It certainly wasn’t a horrific hit, and prior to the rule it would have just been a roughing the passer foul, but as of 2016 it was now a targeting foul.
Disagree 100% when you consider the spirit of the rule and the rampant inconsistency with which it's enforced.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:49 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Seems pretty reasonable. I just think that if you go that route, all ejections should be reviewed (first or second half) and the penalty should be higher for that level of review if upheld...
I feel like I read something that in NCAA games that don't have replay reviews available, if a player is ejected in the first half, they can review the play at halftime and reinstate the player in the second half if appropriate. I would be ok with that
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:50 pm to droliver
quote:
It wasn’t misapplied here though
Even if it wasn't misapplied, if you are suspended from a game, I think there should be some sort of appeal process. I think they should be at least given the opportunity to have their case heard by a third party.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:53 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I think there should be some sort of appeal process. I think they should be at least given the opportunity to have their case heard by a third party.
I think when is all is said and done this is what will happen. Not this year and too late for White unfortunately. Still, White will be ok after drafted in the first round I imagine.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 1:55 pm to viceman
quote:
Still, White will be ok after drafted in the first round I imagine.
Yes, he will be fine, and I admire him for showing good leadership with his tweet yesterday
"God Give His Toughest Battle’s To His Strongest Soldiers." No complaining, it was the hand he was dealt and he's going to be strong and overcome. That's why he's the captain of the defense.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 2:29 pm to gumbeaux
Here's a better idea. Do away with the targeting penalty. Football was fine for 100 years or so without it.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News