Sage Targeting Call

At that point, I was done with those announcers. Them thinking it was clearly targeting told me they were obviously pulling for Arkansas or had no business calling a football game.

The player ducked his head and while his facemask was hit, the direct point of impact was the upper chest. Sage braced himself, he didn’t launch. He had one foot on the ground at impact.

They got the call right in the end. Sage went in with his shoulder to the chest area and contact that was made from his helmet in the neck / head area was initiated by the WR lower his head and by him falling from having leaped and returning to the ground. I am glad that most crews are beginning to get these calls right in the end even though they may throw the flag when the play happen.

That went down the way it should be..... throw the flags, review it, get the call right. Kinda restored a little hope for the game of football.

Sage clearly made the hit intentionally trying NOT to target... he literally almost hit the WR with his back.

I know I’m going to get downvoted for this but I was kind of shocked they reversed it because you could technically argue that by the letter of the law it was targeting. He did “launch” and the first point of contact was to his facemask even though it wasn’t purposeful. With that being said I’m glad they overturned it because obviously it wasn’t purposeful malicious. It seem to me like refs are using more common sense when it comes to targeting than they have in years past.

The targeting rule has done much to detract from the game. One against UGA yesterday was absurd inasmuch as each player hit the other on the shoulder pad with the helmet.

Anybody have a gif of the hit? He brought the boom

He is actually playing in a more natural position this year compared to him being forced to player corner.

I think the reversal was correct, but I think he did launch himself a little. It seems like his back foot may have barely gotten off of the ground in an upward launch and clearly his other foot did, but it was a close call. I think they reversed it because he tried to hit with his shoulder and aimed for the chest. To me the main objective should be to reduce head on collisions. In the process of trying to get to that goal, the rules sometimes go too far. The launch prohibition aspect is one of the things that goes too far. I think the announcers were focused on the letter of the law rather than the goal. By the letters, I THINK there was a launch, and to overturn it, it should be indisputable. Since he wasn’t clearly NOT launching, I would’ve understood the refs not overturning the ruling, however by the spirit of the law it was correct to overturn it. I was happy the refs based their ruling on the spirit rather than the letter of the law.

quote:

---

by the letter of the law it was targeting. He did “launch” and the first point of contact was to his facemask even though it wasn’t purposeful.

---

the letter of the law is "forcible contact" to head/neck area, not "any contact" to head/neck area

the forcible part of the contact was all in the chest.