The Targeting reversal still pisses me off this morning

Be nice if LSU got that protection from the league.

Classic targeting call and why the rule was put in place.
I would still like to know the reasoning that wasn’t targeting.

quote:

---

Be nice if LSU got that protection from the league.

---

If the shoe were on the other foot, I believe we may have.

The SEC doesn’t protect a specific team year in/out, the conference protects what it perceives to be its best shot at a natty.

What they ought to be doing instead is lobbying to change the rule where a player has to sit out of a future game in which an infraction did not occur.

Yep. It’s infuriating when the frickin rules expert on the broadcast even says that’s the definition of targeting.

Official rolls up: no targeting on the play

Even Danielson said it was

But whatever. I’ve come to expect that those things will go against LSU. Seems they usually do

That is exactly the type of break neck hit they are trying to eliminate from the game. Unbelievable that they reversed the call.

quote:

---

The SEC doesn’t protect a specific team year in/out

---

Yes they do, see Bama … for years!

As far as officiating goes, I feel like the “Rules Expert” or “Rules Analyst” the TV broadcast has access to should also be the one who communicated with the White Hat on the field during reviews.

They are non-biased, 3rd parties that will help get more calls right. Rules guy last night said it was targeting (because if fricking was) and the flag was still picked up.

Also Washington clear targeting on his “block” on the touchdown run (and then taunted afterward)

It’s absolute bullshite how a TE as big as him gets “protection” from all kinds of touches and hits yet he gets to use his helmet and maul DBs who can’t hit him anywhere except right in his midsection

quote:

---

Be nice if LSU got that protection from the league.

---

I hear ya.
Sure, Georgia was better and deserved to win. But I swear it seems we never got many “benefit of the doubt” calls or “interpretive” calls this year. On obvious calls, sure we “won” some replays, but on most of those “wins” I don’t know why they even reviewed them. The only one I can remember is in the Arkansas game on a close spot. I think that was the right call on replay, but it was very close and I wouldn’t have been terribly upset if they missed it. Maybe there were others and I just don’t remember.

In this targeting call, I’m not sure why they reversed it. I had the volume muted (because I can’t stand to listen to the announcers), so I don’t know what was said. The only thing I can figure is that targeting rule requires that the player be defenseless. A receiver making a catch is defenseless. A runner going upfield is not (unless being held up by tackler). Maybe they said Josh turned upfield and was already a runner, so he wasn’t defenseless. bullshite, but it might have been their “interpretation” of the play.

Agreed. I’d expect DVs, but it’s just an inconvenient fact that Bama happens to be favored most recent years.

Had we dominated A&M & been in a close game there, we’d have gotten the call. Had the targeting been in the first half, we’d have gotten the call.