PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

Overturned Targeting Call

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Overturned Targeting Call

Postby docabel » Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:19 am

This was mentioned in another thread, but thought it deserved it's own attention.

The targeting call on Page was interesting on several fronts.

1. Don't honestly know if it could have been called roughing the passer since it was a WR running a reverse?

2. Ultimately it didn't matter, because they didn't call any penalty - just targeting. I don't think I have ever seen that before, as there is usually at a minimum an unnecessary roughness/personal foul associated with the targeting. Every other instance that I can recall, after an overturned targeting call, they still enforce the 15-yard personal foul penalty.

3. That was the second second personal foul/unecessary roughness call on #90. If they had called it, would he have been ejected from the game?
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Overturned Targeting Call

Postby mrydel » Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:39 am

#2... if the call is JUST targeting and no personal foul, if overturned there is no penalty. For instance, you can go helmet to helmet without it being called a personal foul. That was changed this year I believe.

#3...ejections come with 2 unsportsmanlike calls, not personal fouls.
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
User avatar
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 31494
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Sherwood,AR,USA

Re: Overturned Targeting Call

Postby HubbaHubba » Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:36 am

It is called roughing the passer not roughing the quarterback I think for this very reason.
User avatar
Posts: 356
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:37 am

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests