on a play where both players are going to the ball BUT if you were watching the first period of Maryland and Buffalo… the Maryland DB pulls a punk hit on a defenseless receiver that clearly looks like a textbook targeting hit and after review.. no targeting. Who the H is making these interpretations in NY or wherever they are reviewing?
So Carter gets called for ‘targeting’
- Thread starter 07mantle
- Start date
He (Carter) will get to play next week though, right? (he was ejected in the first half).
I actually thought his technique was good - he led with the shoulder - but I'm not the replay judge.
I actually thought his technique was good - he led with the shoulder - but I'm not the replay judge.
Not only that, but both Carter and the Purdue player thought the ball was live (i.e., the ball was thrown slightly backward and therefore a lateral and a live ball) and the whistle had not sounded. The Purdue player was not "in the act of catching the ball" - he clearly was "in the act" of going after what he thought was a live ball. Was a horrendous call especially given that no flag was thrown on play and the call was completely fabricated from Replay Booth.
I thought that Carter really led with his shoulder, but he crushed the Purdue player with such force that there was secondary head to head and since the whistle probably blew as well the replay official gave him the targeting call. We got cheated out of seeing Carter make a couple plays… but hopefully he plays a lot this coming week.
I think that bad call gave them some momentum to get that TD.
Disagree that the whistle had blown. Nobody stopped playing and the Purdue player very clearly thought it was a live ball and was actively attempting to recover it, which he wouldn't have been doing had whistles been blowing signalling ball was dead.
A friend of mine works for the Big10 in the review booth, he is part of the crew that does the reviews. He is working a Big10 game later tonight. I asked him his opinion of the call during our game. He didn't watch our game but said he would check it out. Just talked to him today. He said his crew reviews that play this morning and talked about it and it was definitely NOT targeting and it will be discussed next week by all Big10 officials.
no it was early in the game, he already served his time for the crime of playing football too hard
Actually I think Carter might be a starter come mid season. I think he's that good.
hard to tell with such a small sample size but I guess they've been talking him up since preseason practices
Pretty sure they changed the rule. Doesn't have to sit first half. Additionally, PSU can appeal the ruling by the Replay Booth - although I doubt they will because I don't think Carter misses any more game time as it is.
There’s no change. If you get called in the first half of a game, you miss the rest of the game. If you get called in the second half, you miss the rest of that game and the first half of the next. It’s basically always “the rest of this half and the next full half”. Carter got called (early) in the first half.
I would add that the both players going for the loose ball is what caused the shoulders and heads to be at the same level. The ball was on the ground, both players had to lower themselves to go after it.
Watching the GA. vs Oregon game...there was an instance where they looked at a possible targeting play (it was ruled not targeting). Blackledge stated that the NCAA tweaked the targeting rule this year to say that the rule need to be more of the crown (top) of the helmet, more than anything else.
Personally, I agree with a few here that Abdul did not meet that definition of targeting, but also did lead with his shoulder.
Personally, I agree with a few here that Abdul did not meet that definition of targeting, but also did lead with his shoulder.
Shoulder to shoulder isn't a penalty. The WR turning because he didn't catch the ball changed him getting hit in the chest with the head up to his shoulder. The helmets clanged secondary because it's a tackle sport and they have helmets on.
It's pitiful that this was deemed targeting by the replay review guys.
Only in the b1g and only against PSU could this penalty be fabricated out of thin air when no flag was thrown on the field "because Purdue asked for it" (which is the reason given by the commentating crew as to why it was being reviewed). Then on PSU's final drive, the Purdue d-back intentionally hits Warren helmet-to-helmet (literally targets Warren's head with first contact) as he is attempting to catch the ball (which he does catch on play before PSU's game-winning TD) - no flag, no review, no nothing.
Frustrating call when it occurred. After watching a lot of college football this weekend it is a more frustrating call.
I’ve seen more actual targeting not called than the ones that have been called.
The hit just now by Ransom on notre dames sliding qb was more egregious targeting and wasn’t reviewed. Clear helmet to helmet contact on a sliding qb. Same crew as our game I think.
No it's an ACC crew. He launched in a game last year and it was the epitome of targeting because the guy he hit was knocked out and no call.
That was the key that Herbie completely ignores due to his homerism. The duhO$U defender didn't have to go down after the sliding ND QB - he could have just gone over the top of him - but he chose to go down after the QB and intentionally drives his helmet into the ND QB's head.
the holding and chop block calls definitely wouldn’t come from a big ten crew
I was amused how PSU was called for OL Holding on their very first series, but Purdue throws the ball 58 times and their OL isn't called for a single holding call.
Now don't get me wrong, the hold called on PSU tackle in first series as Purdue defender attempting to turn corner was absolutely holding under rulebook, but it was ticky-tack compared to what they let Purdue get away with all night long.
A call like this on the very first series can impact the way an O-lineman will play - essentially, it sends the message, "we're watching closely and we'll throw flags if you hold". The diametric opposite message was sent to Purdue - no flags were thrown regardless of what they did including outright tackles of PSU rushers - the message sent to Purdue was, "You can hold with impugnity" and Purdue did.
I know OL holding can be difficult to discern but the out right tackling of defenders by Purdon't was ridiculous, continuous and simply ignored.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Football Penn State Football Welcomes four More Enrollees to Campus- Latest: Marty Leap
-
