The targeting chronicles, continued

You tell me what’s a stronger example of targeting, the final play of Saturday’s game, or this:

I get that it was the last play and that’s a tough place to throw a flag like that, but, jeez, either you’re serious about protecting players or you’re not, SEC.


Filed under SEC Football

63 responses to “The targeting chronicles, continued

  1. Timphd

    I still get pissed off when I see the replay of Drews hit and see the flag come out before he even got near the QB. Ref was looking for a reason to throw a flag.
    On a separate note, in the future when an ass hat like Carolina Gamecock starts to troll lets all just ignore him. The more we react the more he gets off. Let’s let him stay in his basement and play with his Star Wars figures alone and not give him any satisfaction of annoying us.

    • gastr1

      I do think a person like that should be banned. Personally, I did ignore him–by not commenting or going near anything he wrote. It puts a damper on the whole process, in that way.

      • He’s been banned, but not for trolling. CG was a sockpuppet for somebody who’s already been banned. It took me a little while to catch on, so I apologize for that.

        • Scorpio Jones, III

          Boss….I just could not help myself…sorrys….I thought talking stuff with him would erase a bad memory, but it didn’t work so +1 on the ban….

        • charlottedawg

          let me guess it was someone who had previously been trolling with tech ties?

          • I don’t know what his ties are, but I can say he’s a racist prick.

            • Scorpio Jones, III

              Is a ban attached to the ip address?

              • Scorpio Jones, III

                And, you know what? I have kinda like Mizzou all year, because to the puppet I now have extra incentive to pull for the Tigers…does not matter if he was actually a Gamecock (certainly a dick)…

                • Will (the other one)

                  I’m pulling for Mizzou to win out for a few reasons:
                  1. I think they’re the only east team that could give Bama a game (especially if Franklin is 100%). Those WRs are a matchup nightmare, the run game is good, and their defensive line is legit. Meanwhile South Carolina’s linebackers are almost as bad as our secondary. Florida had over 140 yards rushing in the first half with a backup QB that threw two passes–two!. Bama-Sakerlina would be uglier than what happened to them in 2010.
                  2. Bill C.’s stuff has been a must-read for me for a while now.
                  3. I’ve yet to see any unlikeable Mizzou fans (though a friend who graduated from Kansas claims they exist.) This last one is really the biggest reason.

            • MurphDawg

              Good on ya for wielding the ban hammer so mightily, Senator!

  2. gastr1

    What are the stats on targeting calls? Do we lead the conference in that? I don’t buy in to the ref conspiracy theories so many toss around, and the fact that Murray’s “td” stood at the end of the game Saturday is enough evidence to give me pause about conspiracies. But the facet non one’s been called for that against us and the very existence of Penn Wagers, that puts me right back into a state of doubt again.

    • CitadelDawg

      There’s actually some photo evidence from the end zone that pretty much confirms the TD. There certainly wasn’t any clear evidence he didn’t get in.

  3. Russ

    I thought the final play was a good football hit. Of course, that means all the targeting calls I’ve seen against us were bullshit.

    Consistency? Apparently our definition and the league’s definition aren’t the same.

  4. Bulldawg165

    I’m seriously thinking about emailing McGarity and asking if they’re going to say anything about this inconsistency. You just KNOW it would’ve been called on us if the roles were reversed.

    • peacedogattack

      Of course he’s going to contact the league about it. Every week (we, along with other coaches in the league) send in a tape of calls we want the league to review. In the event that a crew is suspended – and it does happen – it tends to be pretty quiet. I have no doubt the tapes from the game in question play a factor.

      For some reason many people assume we don’t do this stuff, but we do. The real question is: what is the league going to do about it. It’s hard to say from that play but there appears to be some helmet to helmet – that’s very clearly targeting based on the rules. If the league is serious about player safety, that will be a suspension for Penn Wagers and his crew. I don’t put a lot of faith in Slive, however.

      • Bulldawg165

        I suppose what I’m really wondering is if he’s going to be a passive little bitch about it and pretty much act like Milton from office space or if he’s actually going to stand up and say that this shit is unacceptable. My bet is on the former.

      • ncdawg

        There’s definitely helmet to helmet. They even get their face masks entangled for a brief moment. Hard not to be helmet to helmet with the face mask entangled.

  5. Scorpio Jones, III

    I’ve been targeted. I close my eyes and see the ball bouncing away from Matthews…is a prefrontal lobotomy guaranteed to make it go away?

    I clicked into the replay….at the 1:26 mark….and there it was again…

    I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

  6. TennesseeDawg

    Maybe the SEC is just trying to tell us that Vandy’s QB is more important than ours.

    • Nate Dawg

      TD – that comment @ Harry Potter & Helen Hunt Sat/Sun was freakin hilarious so +1.
      And with all this extra protection for the QB these days through ALL levels of football, AM is most definitely proving to be the exception to the (new) rule.

  7. Exell

    Wow, I can not believe how fast that flag is pulled. It is almost simultaneous.

  8. j4k372

    We lost. Please stop complaining about Penn Wagers and no-call targeting fouls.

  9. As for the ref reaching for the flag before the hit even happened, I honestly don’t have a problem with that and it probably happens more often than we realize. I used to ref a lot of upper level soccer games, and there are just certain times where you can see a foul is about to happen even before it actually does……… whistle would already be headed towards my mouth before the incident occurred many times, which to me is the equivalent of already grabbing your flag before the hit. If it doesn’t actually end up happening, then you bring the whistle back down, just like you can shove the flag back in your pocket.

    I think he was pulling the flag because even without the targeting, that was (arguably) a late hit on Drew, and I think he saw the late hit coming. Then he saw the contact to the helmet and rather than calling late hit, he called targeting. You can almost see him double clutch before he throws the flag……….I think that is the instant where in his mind he changed the call from a late hit to targeting. But I don’t think he was already thinking targeting at the time he reached for the flag.

    Mind you, I’m no apologist for SEC refs, and we’ve been screwed plenty of times by them. But I really don’t think the fact that he was already reaching for the flag is an indication of being out to get us, at least in that particular situation.

    But it sucks no matter what because neither of those plays should have been called targeting, but one of them was, and of course it’s the one that hurts us.

    • simpl_matter

      If what you say is true, that was gunslinger officiating. I don’t know anything about soccer, but I know for a fact you are instructed at every level of officiating in football not to go for your flag until AFTER a foul has occurred.

      The way I saw that play, the ref went for the flag early because he was going to throw holding on the lineman (#77) with a fist full of jersey trying to slowdown Drew. When Drew broke free and made the helmet to helmet contact with the QB, the larger foul took precedence.

      • You could be right. Though if that were the case I would have hoped the ref would have called both fouls instead of deciding one takes precedence over the other.

      • Silver Creek Dawg

        I currently referee a lot of upper level youth soccer games and the right Reverend is correct. We are taught to anticipate the play and be in position to blow the whistle.

        That being said, we also have the ability to ignore a clear foul if the offensive team continues to attack (it’s called playing the advantage). That scenario doesn’t exist in American football and that fact may explain his thinking.

        • simpl_matter

          Two different sports, two different ways fouls are approached, I guess. In soccer any foul stops play (correct?), in football no foul stops play once the ball is snapped.

          IMO on that play, the ref would have been in a pickle if he threw holding AND targeting. That would create a scenario where the argument would be that the holding caused Drew’s uncontrolled momentum into the QB.

  10. I actually don’t believe that hit on Murray should be a penalty. However, if we are going to have these targeting penalties it would be the type of play one would use for instructional purposes on when a flag should be thrown. Conversely, the Ray Drew call would be used to demonstrate an over zealous use of the penalty.
    As for the difficulty in throwing the flag at that point in the game question, I have never understood that argument. A critical score in the 2nd quarter counts just as much as it does when the clock runs out in the 4th quarter. Either the game is managed by rules or it is not and I don’t think we leave it to the judgement of officials to determine if holding is not egregious enough to call on the last play of game..

    • EgginDawg

      Thank you CD for also making the same argument I’ve saying for years. It doesn’t matter when it happens during the game, a foul is a foul, period. Why do refs swallow the whistle at the end of a game and it’s ok? You think players and coaches don’t know literal free passes are out there? SEC refs completely suck, we all know that. To say that the incompetence of the refs doesn’t affect the outcome of games is also ignorant.

  11. HVL Dawg

    I’m just numb from it all.

  12. paul

    On a somewhat unrelated note, while I still think we need to replace Grantham and Friend I also think I need to resolve not to post until at least 24 if not 48 hours after the game. I was so pissed on Saturday not even my wife wanted to speak to me. Not the best time to be posting.

    • AusDawg85

      Near the end of the game, I swore I was going to run up and down my street naked “when” we won. My neighbors must all be Auburn fans.

  13. ActuaryDawg

    I’m not saying I agree with the targeting rule, but after a very close read of the details, I have to say that it is being properly enforced in all the games I’ve seen. Before criticizing the officials, you should read the rule:

    “Rule 9-1-4. No player* shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent** with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. “

    *If it is a UGA player, even the slightest incidental contact with any portion of an opposing players helmet or shoulder pads will be considered targeting. In fact, if you think a thug UGA player is even thinking about aggressively making tackle rather than gently placing their opponent on the ground, then just to be safe go ahead and throw the flag.
    **Exception: Aaron Murray. It’s always open season on that guy.

  14. Irishdawg

    .” I was so pissed on Saturday not even my wife wanted to speak to me.”

    I went on a rampage like a rabid wolverine after that game; it was honestly the type of fury that Vikings worked themselves into before battle.

    RE: targeting calls. It’s not just inconsistent; it’s consistent bullshit calls on Georgia and consistent non calls on Alabama. I’ve seen Bama defenders commit aggravated assault numverous times this year and not a flag in sight.

  15. 69Dawg

    Look giving these SEC refs the targeting call is like giving a 15 year old Porn. Once they started enjoying themselves and the SEC started to get the blow back some of the smarter crews backed off. Now I think the call is not made in the 2nd half no matter how bad it is. The SEC does not want to look like they are screwing a team for a future game. Start counting the calls it would be a good question for Steve Shaw.

    Also why in professional and college football are the Officials held to be above the public’s right to know. I can understand the NCAA/Conferences don’t want the coaches or players criticizing the officials but the press should make noise for access to the Referee after a game. These guys are getting paid big bucks even though they are part-time. If they don’t want that then they could quit (please God let it happen and the total asshats might leave). This keeping the punishment secret is like a damn double secret probation, it’s stupid. If the game officials are dedicated idiots they are still idiots, it’s time for more transparency by the SEC and others.

  16. SCDawg

    If you want to see the worst non-call for targeting in the history of targeting, look at the Ohio State game. (stuck at lunch and it was the only game they had on for some reason) One OSU tackler rips the helmet off the ball carrier, then the second comes and and leads with the crown of his helmet on the defenseless, helmetless opponent. No flag for anything.

    • uglydawg

      Pretty bad, SCD…and also see the hit FSU put on the Maryland QB early in that game….no call…almost killed the poor guy.

  17. mp

    If the SEC is worried about lawsuits, they should really be worried about one from Murray. All he has to do is create a compilation of non-penalized hits by Auburn from 2010 and 2013 to demonstrate how little the league was looking out for his safety.

  18. hailtogeorgia

    That’s the thing – we complain about targeting calls when they likely shouldn’t be called (in the Drew case, and DEFINITELY shouldn’t be called in the Wilson case), and then we suffer from targeting calls not being called when they’re borderline. How much of our own complaining leads to it not being called there? Who knows.

  19. FisheriesDawg

    Normally, I’d say you wouldn’t expect that call to be made given the situation (referees don’t want to influence the game any more than they have to). With targeting, though, it is clear that they’ve been told to call anything that might remotely resemble targeting and do it without regard to the situation in which it occurs.

  20. Bryant Denny

    I’m not sure that’s a targeting call.

    On a side note, I don’t gamble, but I’m making an exception and getting up a van load of Boogs for a quick trip over to Philadelphia.

  21. It was targeting because a quarterback throwing a ball is the definition of a defenseless player..,there was unquestionably helmet to helmet contact ,Ford left his feet/launched himself to make the hit, Penn Wagers is a whore’s douche bag,Ford should be disqualified from the first half of the Bama game and UGA should have the ball on the 5 yard line with no time but because a game can not end on a defensive penalty have one play to put it in the end zone. We score,we win Auburns sucks. I’m just sayin

    • 81Dog

      I think this sums it up nicely. If earholing a QB in the act of throwing with the crown of your helmet, after you launched, isn’t “targeting,” what is? I have no idea if that “cost UGA the game.” I just know it’s a penalty, and it should have been called.