OT. Targeting call review question

[sluggo72]

while watching another game, receiver goes over the middle about 15 yes deep is hit by the safety drops the ball, no catch no penalty. They stop play and there is a booth review, targeting is the call, penalty given, player thrown out. I don't know if there was head to head contact or not but can they review plays that no flag was thrown??
Just asking. TIA

 

[Sproul]

while watching another game, receiver goes over the middle about 15 yes deep is hit by the safety drops the ball, no catch no penalty. They stop play and there is a booth review, targeting is the call, penalty given, player thrown out. I don't know if there was head to head contact or not but can they review plays that no flag was thrown??
Just asking. TIA

Yes, booth can buzz down and review targeting that was not called on the field.

 

[Glen]

There were a couple of calls yesterday of hits to the head that were initial targeting calls that were then reversed. Clearly the head area was hit, but probably not flagrant, but should have resulted in the defender being ejected. Based on consequences of hits to the head, the message has to get through, but maybe there should be different levels of ejection with the more flagrant hits resulting in more severe ejections.

The Akron QB was looking for one late in the game where there was helmet to helmet contact, but it was him being hit and driven forward. There was no call and that should be the case. There is the contact the helmet is designed to protect and there is contact that can be coached to avoid. But the sport needs to actively work to eliminate this sort of contact or the sport itself will go the way of boxing.

 

[Fayette_LION]

There were a couple of calls yesterday of hits to the head that were initial targeting calls that were then reversed. Clearly the head area was hit, but probably not flagrant, but should have resulted in the defender being ejected. Based on consequences of hits to the head, the message has to get through, but maybe there should be different levels of ejection with the more flagrant hits resulting in more severe ejections.

The Akron QB was looking for one late in the game where there was helmet to helmet contact, but it was him being hit and driven forward. There was no call and that should be the case. There is the contact the helmet is designed to protect and there is contact that can be coached to avoid. But the sport needs to actively work to eliminate this sort of contact or the sport itself will go the way of boxing.

Michigan benefited from one of these early and FLA got the benefit of a review and no call later. In the other game, they both would have been ejected. Way too much subjectivity in these calls.

 

[Art]

Michigan benefited from one of these early and FLA got the benefit of a review and no call later. In the other game, they both would have been ejected. Way too much subjectivity in these calls.

Agree that their should be consistency in those calls, but trying to lay out specific criteria gets you NFL-type rules. They're great if you prefer applesauce to apples.

 

[blion72]

Michigan benefited from one of these early and FLA got the benefit of a review and no call later. In the other game, they both would have been ejected. Way too much subjectivity in these calls.

in the Mich game that no targeting call was more of a targeting than the one called on PSU in Ann Arbor last year when we already didnt have LBs

 

[Fayette_LION]

Agree that their should be consistency in those calls, but trying to lay out specific criteria gets you NFL-type rules. They're great if you prefer applesauce to apples.

Art, the rule as posted on TV says any hit to the head, they both were hits to the head of a defenseless player. The other game on TV had 2 players tossed because of very similar hits. I can imagine what happens when we play M or OSU. We'll have some key player ejected for a subjective call. That's my concern.

 

[PSU_l]

while watching another game, receiver goes over the middle about 15 yes deep is hit by the safety drops the ball, no catch no penalty. They stop play and there is a booth review, targeting is the call, penalty given, player thrown out. I don't know if there was head to head contact or not but can they review plays that no flag was thrown??
Just asking. TIA

Yes, that is the Rule Change they made last year - i.e., the Replay Officials / Booth can call down a stoppage of any play and review it for a Personal Foul and Targetting if they believe they see something that warrants such a review whether a flag was thrown or not on the play. So again, yes, the Replay Booth Officials can retroactively create a "targeting penalty" and enforcement on a play where no flag was thrown, but this is the ONLY penalty that the Replay Booth / Officials can "create a penalty" on a play where no flag was otherwise thrown.

 

[N&B4PSU]

Regardless of the rules, Bowden needs to have a long sit-down with #56. A long one. That kid was clearly out of control on almost back to back plays (horse-collar 2 plays earlier). In both cases, Stevens was the recipient. On the first hit it's easy to suffer an ACL and on the second... well, it wasn't good.

Kid needs to take a seat for awhile til he gets his sheiss together.

What was fascinating was listening to the main talky head as the replays began on hit #2. He watches and actually says it was "real close" to being targeting.

Real close? Talk about non-committal. Sheesh.