by
30 Comments
Brad Mills-USA TODAY Sports
Ross Dellenger of Sports Illustrated chatted with ESPN's Kirk Herbstreit this week and got his take on the controversial targeting call against LSU linebacker Devin White.

Herbstreit, who will be in Baton Rouge in two weeks for ESPN's College Gameday before the Alabama-LSU matchup, said we would not have ruled White's hit on Nick Fitzgerald as targeting.

He also added that the officials upstairs in the replay booth should be a "safety net" to make sure the right call is made, and in this case, it wasn't.

Loading Twitter Embed....
Filed Under: LSU Football
30 Comments
user avatar
SamuelClemens69 months
Hopefully this drives the offseason change needed to make an NBA type, flagrant 1 vs flagrant 2 type deal.
user avatar
LSU Coyote69 months
You ppl hate on Herbstreit a lot but feel he has turned a new leaf. It has been years since I have the Homer Herbstreit. Hate on that idoit Joey Galloway.
user avatar
VesperiaLSU69 months
The guy upstairs should be a safety net...unless the guy is a Bama grad.
user avatar
WorkinDawg69 months
You misunderstood. He is a safety net....Bama’s safety net
user avatar
TigerSpray69 months
His name is Tom Ritter, Bug Eyes.
user avatar
SmackDaniels69 months
user avatar
WhiskeyPlease69 months
Russian Collusion has no teeth..BAMA SEC Collusion is real
user avatar
RightWingTiger69 months
Anyone with even 1/2 a brain could see it wasn't targeting. The real tragedy is making a player miss half of the next game. The team being penalized and then the player getting tossed from the game should be enough punishment. Unless it's obviously malicious and appears to be purposely trying to injure someone. Carrying the suspension over to the following game has always seemed excessive to me.
user avatar
SamuelClemens69 months
The only thing White did that caused him problems was that final skip-leap he took as he contacted Fitz
user avatar
LSU FSU Grad69 months
Everyone agrees it wasn't targeting except those in Alabama.
user avatar
TigersFan6469 months
And douchebag Moscona.
user avatar
LuzianaFootball69 months
His head went with his chest that D. White rearranged for him. That is the only reason it appeared to whip back. Fitzgerald actually started turning his head before contact and moved it backwards himself.
user avatar
Gumbo169 months
Fitz turned his head to see watch the play. BS call. Clearly not a targeting call.
user avatar
Solo Cam69 months
But but Mascona said it was right. Matt sucks.
user avatar
Rebel69 months
We love Herbie this week, don’t we folks?
user avatar
Party At LSU69 months
I wonder if our local douche Moscona will tell Herbie to quit crying
user avatar
rob6269 months
Moscona is a punk.
user avatar
Modest69 months
Except his head did not whip back, Herbs.
user avatar
cra_cra69 months
from the ref's point of view (which is what he said), it does appear that way. thus the call on the field is understandable. But, as he said, once you look at the video, it wasn't targeting.
user avatar
ByUselves69 months
Herbie tries to call it as he sees it, just sometimes he is blind in 1 eye, and can't see out of the other.
user avatar
abellsujr69 months
They've got to alleviate these gray area calls and make two levels of targeting. The punishment is to severe to eject a player for a gray area call. Give the 15 yard penalty, but ejecting a player for a gray area situation is asinine.
user avatar
Capo69 months
There is no grey area in D White’s hit. Wasn’t targeting. On the other hand, there was no grey area in the other games (Bama/Auburn) on their respective hits either. Neither was called targeting when they in fact were.
user avatar
Spankum69 months
There already is two levels....one is targeting and the other is a regular personal foul.
user avatar
abellsujr69 months
You're combining two different types of fouls. Think basketball. There's a personal foul, then there's flagrant fouls. Two different meanings. Two different types of fouls. But a flagrant foul can come with a serious punishment. That's why they separate flagrant fouls into two categories. 1 and 2. 1, resulting in no ejection for the first offense. A 2 would result in immediate ejection. Both are the same offense, a 2 is just a more serious case of it. Making the decision to not only eject a player for the remainder of the game but ALSO the first quarter of the following game, it should be a serious case or multiple offenses. Doing two 1s could even result in an ejection as well. You can't just throw out ejection for one bull shite push because he touched one part of his helmet or whatever they say he did. He could have knocked him unconscious and the penalty would have been the same lol. There is something fundamentally wrong with the rule. When you can eject a player and/or suspend him for a push because he touched his helmet, something is wrong. Kirk agrees. Many agree at the very least there should be two levels of targeting. Even Marcus Spears agrees with that
user avatar
cypresstiger69 months
Wow, didn't expect love from Herbie
user avatar
Nix to Twillie69 months
He gives us plenty of love. Not shocked you ignore it. It’s the cool thing to do around here. More popular to bitch about people hating us.
user avatar
Nolaughingmatter69 months
It's not love when he agrees with something or hate when he doesn't. I'd just his analysis and opinion.
user avatar
Spankum69 months
Man, Herbie gives LSU all kinds of kudos.
Popular Stories
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram