OT: Oregon game

[Rambler Hawk]

So this was NOT targeting?!?! WTF? Glad Oregon still won….https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1CQaYAi3yH/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

[DukeSlater]

So this was NOT targeting?!?! WTF? Glad Oregon still won….https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1CQaYAi3yH/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Targeting, like pass interference, holding, fair catch signal, and pretty much everything else, is so subjective. Sure, they have the rules written in specific language, but that language is still open to interpretation. They need to dump the targeting rule altogether. There always was a rule for unnecessary roughness. Just use that, and don't throw anybody out unless they get a second call in the same game. Especially with all the betting going on, one call--for targeting or anything else--can change a game which can change a season. And maybe most important, coaches should have the right to challenge a call--or non-call, as with PI--and keep the challenge until they're wrong.

 

[rfgiowa]

It's beyond me how some are called and how some are not called. Both players are lucky they didn't get injured.

 

[herkhatescy2]

I thought it was targeting and couldn't believe that they didn't call it.

 

[Rambler Hawk]

I thought it was targeting and couldn't believe that they didn't call it.

Yeah, I had gotten something from my kitchen and came back to see a 4th and 1….i was like WTF?!?

 

[LIV4GOD]

So this was NOT targeting?!?! WTF? Glad Oregon still won….https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1CQaYAi3yH/?mibextid=wwXIfr

It seems like the most perfect example of targeting that could be given.

 

[Burghawk87]

Targeting, like pass interference, holding, fair catch signal, and pretty much everything else, is so subjective. Sure, they have the rules written in specific language, but that language is still open to interpretation. They need to dump the targeting rule altogether. There always was a rule for unnecessary roughness. Just use that, and don't throw anybody out unless they get a second call in the same game. Especially with all the betting going on, one call--for targeting or anything else--can change a game which can change a season. And maybe most important, coaches should have the right to challenge a call--or non-call, as with PI--and keep the challenge until they're wrong.

So don't call any penalties because it can change the outcome of a game? (Joking, kind of) I actually think targeting should carry a harsher penalty and for the love of whatever deity you choose, call it on the offense as well. Just because a player has the ball doesn't mean they can use their head as a battering ram.