The Targeting Penalty

[TerragonSix]

I understand why it was implemented and in place the way it is.

However, I question how effective it is.

When a guy that is 6'2 is trying to tackle a small player that he is and the smaller player ducks or crouches down, what is the defensive player supposed to do?

I really think targeting should only be enforced if it is clearly egregious, with intent, helmet to helmet.

A DB trying to make a stop in the fourth quarter should not be penalized for making a physical play.

 

[Canes21]

Unless the guy launches with his crown, it should never be called. It was all shoulder, yet they upheld the call. I had no problem with the ref throwing it live. My problem is that the review upheld the call when the replay clearly showed no helmet to helmet.

 

[canedoit]

That call is a prime example of why the rule is a disgusting manipulation of the sport and its implementation is even more so.

 

[Jmhcane]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

 

[JimmyJohnsonsHair]

I raised this same point a couple of weeks ago. The targeting rule is entirely too broad. It should be reserved for very explicit and dangerous helmet to helmet contact. The current interpretation of the rule is ruining the game.

 

[canedoit]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

Caring is irrelevant. Let's not pretend the rule exists because of care and compassion for the players. It's the bloodsuckers limiting liability and nothing more.

 

[Jmhcane]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

Caring is irrelevant. Let's not pretend the rule exists because of care and compassion for the players. It's the bloodsuckers limiting liability and nothing more.

Definitely in the pros, but they should be watching more out for college kids.

 

[Caneadian]

That call is a prime example of why the rule is a disgusting manipulation of the sport and its implementation is even more so.

Every call like that in college or pro makes me less and less likely to watch the sport. Ive already lost considerable interest.

 

[Caneadian]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

If they cared about CTE thye would take their helmets and shoulder pads away and put flags on them. PLAIN AND SIMPLE

 

[canedoit]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

Caring is irrelevant. Let's not pretend the rule exists because of care and compassion for the players. It's the bloodsuckers limiting liability and nothing more.

Definitely in the pros, but they should be watching more out for college kids.

Most definitely in college. The rule doesn't exist for their protection.

 

[Jmhcane]

Probably true. I said "should"

 

[KCcane]

Any time you have a rule they can be interpreted differently from each officiating crew and replay official, its not going to go well. I dont have a problem with the targeting rule per say but I do have a problem with kicking kids out of games for it for making a football play and not something intentional.

 

[amanan28]

CTE. If you care about the players, you accept the targeting policy.

If they cared about CTE thye would take their helmets and shoulder pads away and put flags on them. PLAIN AND SIMPLE

This exactly. Football is a collision sport. If you don't want the chance to get CTE don't play football. Pretty fvking simple.

 

[1hurricane]

Jamal Carter gets an unsportsmanlike penalty every other game I'm sick of him and Rashawn Jenkins I'm they both are seniors. If you watch them all they do is talk.

 

[the storm]

Yes and the official did not interpret it correctly. Can't hide from the instant replay/video board.

I raised this same point a couple of weeks ago. The targeting rule is entirely too broad. It should be reserved for very explicit and dangerous helmet to helmet contact. The current interpretation of the rule is ruining the game.

 

[canedoit]

Jamal Carter gets an unsportsmanlike penalty every other game I'm sick of him and Rashawn Jenkins I'm they both are seniors. If you watch them all they do is talk.

Carter did nothing wrong and has played fairly well. Jenkins has a huge problem with wrapping up on tackles.

 

[Scotty3173]

Anytime you let officials make a call based on their judgement of "intent"...the rule is flawed to begin with.

Then, the replay clearly showed that it was shoulder to shoulder contact and the head snapped back due to a hit on the shoulder...and they still let the call stand. What is the purpose of being able to review the play?

 

[calinative umstudent]

Should targeting be a penalty? yes. Should the penalty be called, reviewed, and upheld when the db hits with his shoulder and doesnt even make contact with the wrs head? **** NO.

 

[SrfGtr]

This penalty is the most subjective route to allowing officials to exude influence over a game and In This instance overreact to a situation which they were intimated by being out of control. Surprised not much posted regarding the hostility between teams. For those not at game , has it been mentioned that the coin toss turned into smack talk minor brawl which cleared both benches and nearly got ugly . Coaches were agressively restraining players on both sides preventing full brawl .

 

[mirednmediocrity2]

Hate these damned ACC refs. No wonder people throw stuff on the field against these clowns. To be honest, I just hate the ACC period.