C’mon, Commish, you’re not even trying with this lame excuse:
“It’s a tough call because you really could have a penalty that’s separate and apart (from targeting),” SEC Commissioner Mike Slive said. “What you’d be asking a replay official to do is make a game-official decision. We’ve put an iron wall between the replay official and the officials on the field. There’s no time when he could be considered another official, and we want to maintain that. Whether or not this particular issue requires crossing into that bright line is something the rules committee will have to consider.”
Or with this one, Steve Shaw:
“Maybe we look at making the targeting foul a special case where we allow replay to come into that judgment and say if only targeting is involved and it’s not deemed targeting, we could take away the 15-yard penalty,” Shaw said. “But that crosses into a very slippery slope of officiating from the booth. A lot of purists have never wanted us to go over that line.”
The purist train done left the station a while ago, Steve. Just ask the genius handling scheduling. But I digress.
Let’s face it – the new rule has already made the replay official a little bit pregnant by allowing him to overturn part of the targeting penalty. If the worry is that some targeting fouls could involve other penalties, even if replay determines there was no targeting of a defenseless player, there’s a real simple solution. Call both penalties. It’s not like officials don’t sometimes call more than one foul on the same play. If the targeting call gets tossed, you’ve still got the other violation that can be enforced.
Why do I get the feeling that “purists” is just another word for being concerned about bruising the sensitive feelings of the officiating crew?