Targeting

[mshunter77]

So what are y'all thoughts opinions on the targeting call on the Bama player? I personally thought it was a BS call as it appeared he was not intentionally trying to hit the in the head. Also I understand that you can not review a penalty but for the booth to say it was not targeting and still give the team in question a 15 yard penalty is absolutely retarded. At least players will not be ejected on stupid calls like that.

[mfalkner]

I agree, the Bama defender was reaching up for the ball. Complete bogus call, and the rule sticks 15 yrds even if they can see it was a bad call. That one needs some work.

The targeting call in the Ole Miss game was also a little weak but was more valid than the Bama one. As I understand the language, if there is a question of targeting on a play they have to call it.

[duckter]

Since this is a new rule, there are going to be plenty of gripes. And, there will be adjustments to these rules, since many of these calls will be quite subjective. Now, one rule that has not changed, but the PAC-12 officials still screwed-up, was the "Downed Ball" by the Wisconsin QB, only to have the time expire and lose the game without the field goal opportunity. Dooohhhhhh.......

[skywalker]

Its a bunch of BS IMO. Football you get hit...sometimes in the head.......might as well start playing tag. It was a crap call that kept a drive alive.......very subjective.

[RedEyed Duck]

I have no issue with the call being made on the field, that referee makes a split second decision with the naked eye. That being said, it is crazy that the replay official can overturn the ejection and not the penalty. They don't review fumbles only to say the call on the field was wrong but its staying the same.