📡 Operation Purple Sky-- the flying of an aerial banner with the #FreeDevinWhite logo.

[#80]

 

[mando]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

 

[#80]

It was a terrible call I was shocked it was confirmed.

 

[94 Grad]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

 

[JoshB]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

This. The "violence" of it isn't the point of the rule.

 

[#80]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

He did not launch. He did not use his helmet or shoulder. He shoved him in the sternum.

 

[mando]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

He did not launch. He did not use his helmet or shoulder. He shoved him in the sternum.

I agree with #80 that he did not launch or use his helmet. What I saw was the LSU LB push the QB with his forearms. Mac simply ran through the QB and hit him with his face mask.

My view is neither play was targeting, that was my point. I understand violence is not part of targeting criteria.

 

[planomateo]

Terrible call.

 

[BamaFan334]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

No way man. Fitzgerald lowered his head as he knew he was about to absorb a hit. The is one of the most unfortunate calls I've seen in a while. What pisses me off more is that their best defensive player is out against us for the first half. We wanted a challenge, get an LSU team most on here expected to win five or six games this year, and now we have to play them minus their best defensive player for a half. Bullcrap call and unfortunate for our team as we want a real Top 5 challenge to prove a point, not beat a team down their best player. I would protest if I were Coach O with the League Office.

 

[Tidestalker]

Soooooo tough for defenders now a days. I feel bad for those guys!

Another reason I cringe when any of our starters on D are still on the field in the blowouts... Particularly the DB's... 1 play away from getting sat down for a marginal hit!

 

[94 Grad]

The other two views they showed in the game show it as targeting AND the review CONFIRMED it.

I agree that it wasn’t much of a hit, but it is what it is.

 

[#80]

The other two views they showed in the game show it as targeting AND the review CONFIRMED it.

I agree that it wasn’t much of a hit, but it is what it is.

Did you watch the game? I did. It was a bad call. You and the review crew need an eye exam.

 

[TUSKtimes]

FitzGerald is 6'5" and White hit him in the head. White put his helmet on him with bad intentions. He gone.

 

[TerryP]

Good for Bama but this did not look like targeting to me. Mack Wilson's hit on the UT QB was more violent and it was not targeting either in my opinion.

At this point I guess I no longer have a clue what targeting is.

He lowers he head and launches. He hits the QB in the Facemask. It’s not a violent hit, but it’s targeting.

Mack had his head up and didn’t launch. He hit the QB at the top of the number and not in the head. It was violent, but not targeting in any way.

He did not launch. He did not use his helmet or shoulder. He shoved him in the sternum.

It was the correct call. There's no doubt about in any way, shape, or form. The contact, even mild, was to the head and neck area which is literally spelled out in the rule itself. (Sort of interesting that even Marcus Spears, as big of a homer as he is, agreed with the call. He said it was textbook targeting because of where he was hit.)



The comparison to Mack's hit is lost on me. It was textbook tackling. His face was literally buried in the guys sternum.

 

[planomateo]

Perhaps textbook, but in my opinion, it's still a terrible call for this play. He pushed him in from the chest...is that technically the neck area?

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)
Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
• Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet

 

[planomateo]

Better view.

 

[TerryP]

Perhaps textbook, but in my opinion, it's still a terrible call for this play.

I just don't see how you could come to that conclusion.

• Leading with helmet, shoulder forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.

1) Lead with the forearm and elbow. √
2) Forcible contact (there was enough force to put him on his butt.) √
3) Head or nick area. √

It checks all the boxes.

A couple of years ago it wouldn't have been called roughing the passer. It wouldn't have been called, period. But that was yesteryear.

I don't agree with that type of hit being one that leads to an ejection. However, I don't believe the first targeting flag is either (Unless is so blatant you can't walk away from the flag.) It is the rule.

Perhaps what you meant was...

Perhaps textbook, but in my opinion, it's still a terrible rule for this play.

Ya?

 

[planomateo]

Yeah, I highlighted that line in my post. I just don't like the call (or rule) as a fan of football.

The laughable part in all of this, LSU with Devin White still doesn't have a chance if we're being honest here...they damn well know it. Burrow doesn't have the skills to beat Alabama.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Yeah, I highlighted that line in my post. I just don't like the call (or rule) as a fan of football.

The laughable part in all of this, LSU with Devin White still doesn't have a chance if we're being honest here...they damn well know it. Burrow doesn't have the skills to beat Alabama.

You may have to get used to it. The college game is now allowing a lot more physicality toward the QB than what is currently being allowed in the pros. Protecting QBs is a growing trend.

 

[TerryP]

The laughable part in all of this,

At some point today I'm going to surf over a LSU forum just to see how often they refer to his ejection/suspension despite the win. I know it's there--A LOT.

The rankings and ratings haven't been updated for this morning...but, right now, if we were to play LSU (based on the rankings of 13 October) we're looking at Bama -12 to Bama -12.5. I wonder if the bookmakers will inflate that a bit just because it's Bama.