Started By
Message

re: Ok the targeting rule has to be reassessed

Posted on 1/2/23 at 3:50 pm to
Posted by POTUS2024
Member since Nov 2022
15097 posts
Posted on 1/2/23 at 3:50 pm to
No, it was a good clean hit.
Posted by ConcreteThreshold
Denver, CO
Member since Jun 2017
1324 posts
Posted on 1/2/23 at 3:51 pm to
Crown of the helmet to the head/neck area of a defenseless player. That was textbook targeting and could be used as a prime example of the penalty.
Posted by bayoucracka
Member since Sep 2015
6877 posts
Posted on 1/2/23 at 3:56 pm to
quote:

No, it was a good clean hit.

Man I can't imagine going through life being this dumb
Posted by Captain_Awesome06
Nashville, TN
Member since Aug 2013
820 posts
Posted on 1/2/23 at 4:04 pm to
quote:

No, it was a good clean hit



Yup seemed that the defender had his head up and made a hard hit to a ball carrier. But I've seen that called targeting so damn often why wasn't it this time? I've seen less hits than that get called as targeting.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram