Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
This targeting penalty
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 12
| visibility 2,079

This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 2:44 PM

Needs some serious rework. It’s a terribly administered penalty with way too much subjectivity.


Message was edited by: SAG6060®


2024 orange level membermilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 2:46 PM

It's there to take away hits to the head. That was about as clear as it gets.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

But you can't review a penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:15 PM

I know you can review a targeting penalty AFTER it has been called just to determine weather or not a player is ejected, but how can you go back and review weather or not it was a penalty to begin with? As far as I know, no flag was ever thrown.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: But you can't review a penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:26 PM

You can't call a penalty, but you can disqualify a player from the booth. There was no penalty called (only an ejection). I think. :)

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:19 PM [ in reply to Re: This targeting penalty ]

I’m not saying it needs to be taken away. I agree 100% on player safety and to remove forceful contact to the head or neck. But come on. The defender high fived his helmet basically because he was trying to block the pass and incidentally hit him in the head with his hand. And I think it should be a
2 strike system on these questionable targeting fouls. Now if the guy goes full speed and launches the crown of his helmet directly toward and into a defenseless players head then yes eject him. But what happed withe Tanner against Louisville and what happened in this game. These are clearly not intentional. Let the players play. Punish the ones that are clear cut targeting and give a strike to those questionable ones where no ill intent is observed. At least something to this effect is much better than what is in place now.

2024 orange level membermilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I think you mean subjectivity.


Sep 23, 2017, 2:53 PM

Objectivity means there is no "open to interpretation" aspect.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think you mean subjectivity.


Sep 23, 2017, 3:13 PM

Indeed I did mean subjectivity. Fixed. Ty

2024 orange level membermilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 2:58 PM

So using the crown of the palm is targeting. Where is that in the definition.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:04 PM

Can't hit the passer in the head or neck area. Which Pugh did, even though it was ticky tac. The officials on the field did not call it but super enforcer up in the both had to have an impact. I'd let that one slide like the officials on the field were going to do.

Seems like FSU is getting the same treatment that we get on these targeting calls by an ACC crew. I have yet to remember targeting being called on our opposing team. In years. Yet, we have them called on us every year. How is that?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:13 PM

You can't hit the quarterback in the head and not get called. Come on.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:22 PM

Lord, the passer ducked back to try to get the ball over Pugh. NCSU's WR saw it the entire time. He did not get blindsided. It is not like he intended to hit him in the head. Pugh was in the air extend and the WR (throwing WR) leaned back. It was not a vicious hit, but contact, nonetheless. Ejecting him for a full game is ridiculous. Personal foul, ok, but ejection, no.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

because we haven't let defenders near any of our ball


Sep 23, 2017, 3:23 PM [ in reply to Re: This targeting penalty ]

carriers in years!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This targeting penalty


Sep 23, 2017, 3:28 PM

Must protect players but this is a lawyer penalty. Should not be able to use slomo or freeze frame to review; players didn't have it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 12
| visibility 2,079
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic