My 2 cents - Targeting festivities

[NB4PSU]

Not well thought out (might not even be worth the 2 cents lol) but something we kicked around last night when #11 got tossed but the Purdue cheap shotter that almost ended SC's year didn't.

There's just something not right about a player getting ejected for targeting when the refs on the field didn't even flag it when it happened. IMO, when thaat happens, it isn't really "targeting" but more a personal foul. I can see 2 of those getting you tossed. I can even agree with you must come out for the remainder of that defensive series (possibly even the one after)... but to get the boot like that for what we saw seemed excessive.

OTOH, if it IS called on the field and confirmed by replay, than off you go. And yes, refs might just start tossing the hanky on everything close to fix that change... but it might be worth trying. Feel really bad to see ANY kid get thrown out that early for something like that. See it all the time.

OTOH, I'd love to see a rule that if someone cheap shots a player (like was done to Sean) then the offender does not return until the player they whacked returns. Now I can see how that one gets sticky (coach chooses to keep out a RB when he has other studs to replace him, thus keeping the defender on the bench) but there should be some punishment for what was done. Just an opinion on that...

that said, I'm far more zeroed in on the targeting issue.

 

[PSUSignore]

The game desperately needs tiers for targeting, with a lower severity penalty that doesn't come with an ejection. Per the letter or the rule it was probably the right call but many players that are not doing anything malicious and continuing to play to the whistle don't deserve an ejection. 11 wasn't sure if the ball was still live because it may have been ruled a backwards pass and the offensive player was still trying to pick it up, therefore an attempt to tackle him wasn't an unusual or dirty play and it sure would have been hard to tackle a guy lying on the ground without lowering his body as well.

 

[Corner Room Breakfast]

We have way too many questionable targeting calls . Last year Ellis Brooks vs. Wisconsin.

Btw the cheap shot on Clifford's legs should have been an ejection if anything . I was all for retaliation at that point.

 

[PSUAlum]

The game desperately needs tiers for targeting, with a lower severity penalty that doesn't come with an ejection. Per the letter or the rule it was probably the right call but many players that are not doing anything malicious and continuing to play to the whistle don't deserve an ejection. 11 wasn't sure if the ball was still live because it may have been ruled a backwards pass and the offensive player was still trying to pick it up, therefore an attempt to tackle him wasn't an unusual or dirty play and it sure would have been hard to tackle a guy lying on the ground without lowering his body as well.

Carter either accidentally hit helmet to helmet first or first contact was shoulder to shoulder while going for the ball. It was clear as day that he was not targeting the Purdue player. This type of accidental targeting should be 15 yard penalty and player must sit out a certain number of drives. Obvious targeting for example the Minnesota player targeting Joey Julius on a kick return in 2016 should be tossed for the rest of the game.

 

[PSUSignore]

Carter either accidentally hit helmet to helmet first or first contact was shoulder to shoulder while going for the ball. It was clear as day that he was not targeting the Purdue player. This type of accidental targeting should be 15 yard penalty and player must sit out a certain number of drives. Obvious targeting for example the Minnesota player targeting Joey Julius on a kick return in 2016 should be tossed for the rest of the game.

I initially thought he was going for the ball but on replay it looked like he thought the Purdue player had the ball and he was going for the tackle.

 

[step.eng69]

There's just something not right about a player getting ejected for targeting when the refs on the field didn't even flag it when it happened

I believe the player also will ineligible for the first half of the following game.

 

[Bosco2]

I believe the player also will ineligible for the first half of the following game.

I think that only happens if the targeting was called during the 2nd half. Pretty sure Carter doesn't need to sit out any longer than he already has. Of course, I've been wrong before.

 

[91Joe95]

It was a pretty chintzy call. That said if he actually tries to reach back for the ball it's probably not called. The big reoccurring problem I see with Penn State defenders is terrible tackling technique. They routinely don't wrap up properly and end up looking like they're simply going for a big hit.

 

[step.eng69]

I think that only happens if the targeting was called during the 2nd half. Pretty sure Carter doesn't need to sit out any longer than he already has. Of course, I've been wrong before.

Thanks Bosco2

 

[JakkL]

The issue is that the defender is in a no win situation. If he stays high he's potentially seen as head hunting. If he goes low then he's potentially lowering his head. Tell me how you hit a guy 2 feet off of the ground with your head up? Its almost impossible because your upper body is angled down. The second option is what happened to carter. I think the refs in the booth need to look to see can the defender get his head off of the line and did he do it. Carter did get his head off of the line.

 

[Ludd]

Get rid of all the “extra” targeting rules…if it’s not crown of helmet to the other player’s helmet, then it shouldn’t be targeting. They’ve succeeded in pretty much eliminating head hunting, so it should only be used in obvious situations. Like everything else, they’ve gone too far and made the rule far too subjective. It’s a violent game, you can’t stop players from getting hurt.

 

[IrishHerb]

The game desperately needs tiers for targeting, with a lower severity penalty that doesn't come with an ejection. Per the letter or the rule it was probably the right call but many players that are not doing anything malicious and continuing to play to the whistle don't deserve an ejection. 11 wasn't sure if the ball was still live because it may have been ruled a backwards pass and the offensive player was still trying to pick it up, therefore an attempt to tackle him wasn't an unusual or dirty play and it sure would have been hard to tackle a guy lying on the ground without lowering his body as well.

To me it didn't look like he was trying to tackle ... looked more like he was trying to get under him to recover the ball ... and in doing so their heads bumped. Was really surprised that targeting was called from the booth.