SEC to revisit targeting penalty after this season

[starkvegasdawg]

Looks like the main thing they will be looking at is eliminating the 15 yard penalty on targeting calls that are overturned by replay. All it took was one of the SEC elites getting screwed by that call for this to happen. In this case, it was UGA. You can bet had it been Alabama that was cost a game by that rule it would have been revisted and overturned before the teams got back on their busses.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9868570/sec-review-targeting-penalty-controversy-season

[BulldogBear]

All it took was one of the SEC elites getting screwed by that call for this to happen. In this case, it was UGA. You can bet had it been Alabama that was cost a game by that rule it would have been revisted and overturned before the teams got back on their buses

This ^

[smootness]

It's funny to me that things like this take this kind of time anyway.

It's pretty obvious that if video replay overturns the repercussions of a penalty because it's decided it wasn't actually a penalty, that the yardage should also be negated.

But even now, it seems like it would be pretty easy to get everyone on a conference call and say, 'Yeah, that's dumb, change it now'.

[Sienfield]

I didn't realize this was an SEC rule. I thought it applied to all teams in the NCAA.

[BhamDawg]

Looks like the main thing they will be looking at is eliminating the 15 yard penalty on targeting calls that are overturned by replay. All it took was one of the SEC elites getting screwed by that call for this to happen. In this case, it was UGA. You can bet had it been Alabama that was cost a game by that rule it would have been revisted and overturned before the teams got back on their busses.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9868570/sec-review-targeting-penalty-controversy-season

No no, this all started with King Saban, other coaches have just jumped on board. Saban planted the seed back in September after the A&M game. Ha Ha Clinton-Dix was penalized and ejected for targeting but the ejection was overturned. His quote after the game:

"If you can review a play to say a guy should be ejected or not be ejected, to me, you should review it to say it was a penalty or not a penalty," Saban said during his Monday press conference. "That's not what the rule is. I'm giving you my opinion. That's something the rules committee did. That has nothing to do with SEC officiating."

[dickiedawg]

I think the replay official being able to overturn the penalty would be terrible. As it stands, the replay official can't say "No, it wasn't illegal" all he can do is say "there was no intent, he doesn't need to be ejected."

There is a difference... much like there used to be a difference between a 5-yard facemask and a 15-yard facemask.

[DownwardDawg]

I think the replay official being able to overturn the penalty would be terrible. As it stands, the replay official can't say "No, it wasn't illegal" all he can do is say "there was no intent, he doesn't need to be ejected."

There is a difference... much like there used to be a difference between a 5-yard facemask and a 15-yard facemask.

The penalty is thrown for targeting. If the replay official decides it was not targeting, the penalty should be waived. Otherwise, what is the penalty for?

[TXDawg]

I think the replay official being able to overturn the penalty would be terrible. As it stands, the replay official can't say "No, it wasn't illegal" all he can do is say "there was no intent, he doesn't need to be ejected."

There is a difference... much like there used to be a difference between a 5-yard facemask and a 15-yard facemask.

The replay official does NOT judge intent. He determines whether or not targeting occurred and if it did, the penalty and the ejection stand. If it didn't, the ejection is overturned, but the penalty yardage remains. That's what's so stupid. If the penalty didn't occur, there should be no yardage awarded.

[ShotgunDawg]

The problem is that many of these targeting penalties aren't on purpose, but are still late hits or unnecessary roughness. This could get dicey... because, had the targeting rule not been in effect, the refs would have still thrown a flag for a late hit or unnecessary roughness.

So how does the replay booth reverse the call, claim no 15 yard penalty, and no ejection when there was actually a late hit on the play.

Should the refs be able to throw 2 flags. One for targeting and another for a late hit, and only the targeting can be overturned?