Targeting

[Salfrog]

Referees also need to be held accountable for very bad calls & non calls. Every league should have rules in place for this. Give refs the 3 strike rule. 1st strike, you get written up. 2nd strike, you get fined & suspended. 3rd strike, you get fired.

Just like all or most of us have job performance guidelines, so should these clowns.

 

[SuperTFrog]

Referees also need to be held accountable for very bad calls & non calls. Every league should have rules in place for this. Give refs the 3 strike rule. 1st strike, you get written up. 2nd strike, you get fined & suspended. 3rd strike, you get fired.

Just like all or most of us have job performance guidelines, so should these clowns.

Every ref would likely be done before the game is over. There are so many subjective calls that could go either way. I bet 20 holding calls are missed every week.

 

[Salfrog]

Every ref would likely be done before the game is over. There are so many subjective calls that could go either way. I bet 20 holding calls are missed every week.

Oh well. As GP always says, next man up...

 

[Deep Purple]

Rule was changed in 2014:

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...no-longer-penalized-overturned-targeting-call

My opinion is that if the hit was high enough to appear to be targeting but overturned as targeting after review, it should still be a 15 yard penalty, just without the ejection.

Are we allowing hits to the helmet as long as the receiver isn't defenseless? Bad idea IMO.

That doesn't make any sense. If the hit doesn't qualify as targeting, then there's no infraction of the rules. So you're just gonna randomly penalize teams 15 yards for making legal hits?

Like being charged with robbery, acquitted on trial, and then told, "Okay, you're innocent so this won't go on your record, but you're still gonna have to serve three years in prison."

 

[y2kFrog]

That hit is a penalty in the NFL 100% of the time, and most likely a pretty big fine too. That was the definition of targeting. The rule is way too complicated!

 

[froginmn]

That doesn't make any sense. If the hit doesn't qualify as targeting, then there's no infraction of the rules. So you're just gonna randomly penalize teams 15 yards for making legal hits?

Like being charged with robbery, acquitted on trial, and then told, "Okay, you're innocent so this won't go on your record, but you're still gonna have to serve three years in prison."

No, I'm saying that a helmet to helmet hit should be a penalty regardless of whether the player is defenseless. They're calling targeting and then if they say the player wasn't defenseless, it's not a penalty at all.

It's still a cheap hit that should be penalized, just not with ejection if the player isn't judged to be defenseless.

So in your over the top example, it's like being charged with armed robbery, then they discover you didn't have a weapon.

You should still be charged with simple robbery.

 

[Frog DJ]

If that was not helmet-to-helmet then there is no such thing as helmet-to-helmet.

Go Frogs!

 

[Big Frog II]

Refs too concerned about knee pads to watch the game.

 

[BrewingFrog]

Firstly, let's settle something right off the bat: That crew is absolutely the most incompetent bunch of clowns in the entirety of the NCAA, and how they haven't been fired for the simple Good of the Game by now is incomprehensible. Clean house, Bowlsby!

Secondly, I personally hate the "Targeting" penalty, because it is poorly written and subject to far too much interpretation. Each time they try to "fix" it, it gets worse. Our blithering imbecile of an official could have taken the time to explain why what was blatantly obvious to everyone in the Stadium (save the fools in charge of officiating) was not what we thought it was. He explained every other damned thing, but not that.

As explained later, I can't even accept that excuse. There has been no consistency across Collegiate Football as to What It Is so far, and nobody is really even trying to. It's now in the territory once inhabited by the Olde Days definition of pr0n: "I know it when I see it."

 

[SwissArmyFrog]

Several things:
1) leading with crown of the helmet into the head of ball carrier, receiver, or QB has always been a personal foul before the targeting rule was put in place.

This used to be called 'spearing,' but I haven't heard that term used in quite a long time.

 

[AroundWorldFrog]

Every ref would likely be done before the game is over. There are so many subjective calls that could go either way. I bet 2,000 holding calls are missed every week.

Fixit

 

[ifrog]

Here is another example I think from the same refs overturning a targeting call last week as well.

Mosley can kick rocks

 

[The TCU Football Jerk]

Bottom line is that B12 refs suck. Have at least as long as TCU has been in the league. And I don't mean that being a TCU homer. Watch any B12 matchup and you'll see just how bad they are.