Pictorial Evidence of the Apparent Current Definition of Targeting

[dWarriors88]

Did you guys see the penalty where the UGA player jumped on the back of one of our Linemen during a PAT attempt before the half?

 

[AlistarWills]

Did you guys see the penalty where the UGA player jumped on the back of one of our Linemen during a PAT attempt before the half?

Didn’t see it but knew what the penalty was for. Which let’s be honest. Taking a personal foul to the kickoff location is kinda making the penalty useless. If the ball goes through the end zone the returning team is basically not punished. They need to assess that penalty AFTER the return. If you’re going to make it count, then MAKE IT COUNT!

 

[bamaga]

Never the less, talking to Georgia fans, they swear we have the refs paid off because we got all the calls

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I think you’re undercounting. What did they teach you at the bank anyway?

The biggest lesson was the answer to, “What is 2 + 2?”

The correct answer being not 4, but another question: “Oh, I don’t know….what do you want it to be?”

 

[Krymsonman]

The rule and the penalties handed out need to be updated. They have done a good job of eliminating that kind of tackling in today’s game for the most part.

I understand the targeting rule, but the punishment does not fit the crime. Most of the time, the targeting foul was not intentional, yet the player is ejected from the game, and if it happens in the second half, they're out for the first half of the next game. The ejection part needs to go as too often the call is a game changer. Make it a 15 yarder, and if it happens again, then ejection. This would never make sense though to the rules idiots.

 

[bamaga]

Well, well, well

 

[RammerJammer14]

This was not called targeting.

What are we even doing?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1972136166221648031

Nearly broke his neck. Smh

 

[Windsortide]

I understand the targeting rule, but the punishment does not fit the crime. Most of the time, the targeting foul was not intentional, yet the player is ejected from the game, and if it happens in the second half, they're out for the first half of the next game. The ejection part needs to go as too often the call is a game changer. Make it a 15 yarder, and if it happens again, then ejection. This would never make sense though to the rules idiots.

Agreed 100%

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Well, well, well
View attachment 53303

This is clearly an inaccurate representation. There are no odds on Arch Manning.

Signed,

All The Talking Heads

 

[81usaf92]

Unless / until they can make the call consistently, I wish they'd drop the foul.

I get the reasoning, I really do - but the SEC refs are SO BAD that it truly feels like it's used to affect the outcome of the game rather than enforced uniformly.

They should just go to the NFL rule and be done with it. The NFL officiating id it makes far more sense and has less drastic consequences and time wasted on it.

 

[December05]

This is clearly an inaccurate representation. There are no odds on Arch Manning.

Signed,

All The Talking Heads
[/QUOTE]
Arch will be fine. As long as he hits near 60%, goes for 150+ through the air and keeps it under three INT’s against Oklahoma…. that New York invite is still safe….

 

[December05]

Smith’s targeting call was correct and the “crown of the helmet” part of the rule that got him is there to protect HIM from compressing the vertebrae in his neck and paralyzing him. You need to see what you are hitting. In years past that hit would be called spearing.
The UGA player launching himself like Superman into the pile headfirst towards a literally defenseless player who was being held up violates so many aspects of the rule it’s not funny.
I do wonder if a suspension for the first half of their next game can be done retroactively because the officials absolutely flubbed that one.

I don’t keep up to date on targeting definitions which seem to update every year. It looked like James was trying to get low enough to “get a hat on the ball” and jar it loose. Not saying that’s any safer, just that it was likely his motivation. I liked the original intent of targeting, to protect defenseless players such as receivers on crossing routes and very much agree that should be kept in the game. However, most of the updates go too far beyond that.

My main beef is if this is called, so be it, but you can’t NOT call Georgia for committing the pictured definition of targeting a half hour later.

 

[December05]

Never the less, talking to Georgia fans, they swear we have the refs paid off because we got all the calls

To paraphrase Ron White, you can’t fix Georgia fans.

 

[cdub55]

I just don’t understand how this isn’t targeting. Jumps, drops head, launches into defenseless player’s helmet. What the heck?

Per rule 10.2A, if a player superman's into a defenseless player 3 or more seconds after the whistle has been blown, the player is deemed invisible and a penalty is not to be assessed.

 

[RollTide_HTTR]

When targeting first became a thing I got it right most of the time. But now? I have no idea. I feel completely lost as to what is and isn't targeting now

 

[cdub55]

Unless / until they can make the call consistently, I wish they'd drop the foul.

I get the reasoning, I really do - but the SEC refs are SO BAD that it truly feels like it's used to affect the outcome of the game rather than enforced uniformly.

I've seen people treated better who have committed capital murder. I've never liked the rule that a player is kicked out of a game for a bang/bang play. Give the player a penalty, if they happen to get two penalties then eject them. Seperate the penalties similar to what the college rules do in basketball with flagrant fouls. Have Targeting 1 and Targeting 2 level penalties. If it is egregious enough then eject the player with only one offense.

 

[jashleyren2]

I note that the official call always comes from "the room" in Birmingham SEC HQ. The number of times they ask for a review for a "missed" targeting, seems very subjective. It's too important to the outcome of these games for that much subjectivity to be allowed.

Not a fan of "the room" in Birmingham SEC HQ. No offense meant personally to anyone here who might be employed there.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I note that the official call always comes from "the room" in Birmingham SEC HQ. The number of times they ask for a review for a "missed" targeting, seems very subjective. It's too important to the outcome of these games for that much subjectivity to be allowed.

Not a fan of "the room" in Birmingham SEC HQ. No offense meant personally to anyone here who might be employed there.

Also, targeting is one of the few penalties than can be called from "the room," even if it isn't called on the field.

So missing the superman targeting call isn't the fault of only the refs on the field. The guys in Birmingham were playing Three Blind Mice too. (Side note for UGA fans: So much for Alabama owning all SEC refs).

I'm guessing the B1G has a similar centralized review process. If so, they also were playing Three Blind Mice on the egregious PSU player's uncalled foul.

 

[CrimsonNagus]

This was not called targeting.

What are we even doing?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1972136166221648031

This is the worst no-call I have ever seen. You can see the helmets flex in the second angle. How in the world was this ruled not targeting. Every single ref and booth review ref in this game should be fired.

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

They should just go to the NFL rule and be done with it. The NFL officiating id it makes far more sense and has less drastic consequences and time wasted on it.

May as well, everything else about CFB has become the NFL...