|
I guess part of the problem I have is the automatic ejection if it's deemed targeting. I'm going to go through the plays as I see them as a fan with minimal rules knowledge specific to targeting.
The first play (0:00) I can see being penalized. He didn't use great form, essentially leading with his shoulder in a way that had him going in somewhat blindly, but as the commentators said, the blow to the head was a result of the bracing for impact, not the defender head-hunting. An ejection is undeserved there.
The second play (0:43) I don't believe should be a penalty at all. The quarterback lowered his head and shoulder into the contact as well. How do they penalize one and not the other?
The third play (2:39) I can see where the flag is thrown as there was helmet-to-helmet contact, but it certainly wasn't malicious. It was facemask to chest contact primarily.
The fourth play (4:33) is just inexcusably bad. I can understand that watching the play live, the official may not have seen that the player was essentially pushed into the quarterback on the ground by an offensive lineman. But to uphold that call on review is absolutely shameful.
The fifth play (5:45) is just a great football play. I don't see it meeting the wording in jTheUmp's post, so I assume there's some interpretation being utilized? It's a shame that the play resulted in a penalty and it's made even worse by an ejection.
As I've stated in a previous post, jTheUmp's post, and the penalty being called "targeting," suggests to me that there's supposed to be some level of intent to justify an ejection. I just don't see that in any of these five plays.
One other opinion I'd like to throw out there. I personally feel these calls should be reviewed differently. The call should be made entirely based on replay. Either it's targeting or it's not. There should be no "call stands" when it's determining whether or not a player is allowed to stay in the game.
|