Just curious for those of you that watched the Utah game last night what you thought of the two targeting calls?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Either way, I wish they would change the rule to not have an automatic ejection from the game. Both of those hits IMO should not warrant an ejection.

The last call with six seconds left was a potential game changer. A pass interference on steroids.

Edit Nevermind. I got it mixed up with San Diego game.

That SDSU targeting probably saved the game for them. It was a dirty play, but it also sealed the game.

I thought the first one was probably the correct call according to the rule but the rule is unworkable in that situation. And I hate that it’s an ejection. Force them to sit for a few plays or something on the first one if that’s what you want and then eject then if they get multiple targeting calls.

I thought the second one was bad.

A bunch of Utes on Twitter thought the hit in Covey should have been a penalty but that was a good clean hit I thought

The first one was a direct shot to the Head. He should have been ejected. Very similar to the one MSU got away with against us.

The second one was garbage. Just a great football play and certainly not worth an election.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Intermeddler wrote:I thought the first one was probably the correct call according to the rule but the rule is unworkable in that situation. And I hate that it’s an ejection. Force them to sit for a few plays or something on the first one if that’s what you want and then eject then if they get multiple targeting calls.

I thought the second one was bad.

A bunch of Utes on Twitter thought the hit in Covey should have been a penalty but that was a good clean hit I thought

I pretty much agree with you. I think following the rule the first was the correct call. The second was bad all around.

The Covey hit was definitely not targeting. I'm glad I didn't wake up this morning as Covey he has gotta be hurting

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Aggie_CEE wrote: ↑

September 16th, 2018, 3:44 pm

Either way, I wish they would change the rule to not have an automatic ejection from the game. Both of those hits IMO should not warrant an ejection.

Yeah ejections should be reserved for truly malicious hits. I support 15 yard penalties, but ejecting players greatly affects the outcome of games and should not be done frivolously.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote:

Aggie_CEE wrote: ↑

September 16th, 2018, 3:44 pm

Either way, I wish they would change the rule to not have an automatic ejection from the game. Both of those hits IMO should not warrant an ejection.

Yeah ejections should be reserved for truly malicious hits. I support 15 yard penalties, but ejecting players greatly affects the outcome of games and should not be done frivolously.

We’ve gone through this process with hockey the past 25 years. Checking from behind used to be left up to the official, once it was made a major plus misconduct (dq) it has been largely eliminated from youth hockey. There needs to be an over correction to get the hits out of the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First was the correct call (tough rule though - I agree they shouldn't be ejected for a whole game, especially if it's on a runner)

second was wrong- Maybe touched the facemask a little but questionable if it touched at all (helmet fell off a bit - doesn't mean it really touched).

I'm amazed they got the covey call right. Almost like the Doughty hit on the kicker - I thought they would incorrectly throw a flag since it was so vicious. Felt bad for Covey this game. That's a lot of good work and got so beat up in a loss.

TheAKAggie wrote: ↑

September 16th, 2018, 5:42 pm

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote:

Aggie_CEE wrote: ↑

September 16th, 2018, 3:44 pm

Either way, I wish they would change the rule to not have an automatic ejection from the game. Both of those hits IMO should not warrant an ejection.

Yeah ejections should be reserved for truly malicious hits. I support 15 yard penalties, but ejecting players greatly affects the outcome of games and should not be done frivolously.

We’ve gone through this process with hockey the past 25 years. Checking from behind used to be left up to the official, once it was made a major plus misconduct (dq) it has been largely eliminated from youth hockey. There needs to be an over correction to get the hits out of the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess. 15 yard penalties are good punishments. I agree there are hits that do warrant ejections, but just from my perspective as a college football fan it seems they far overdo it.

That incident makes Utah fans want the ejection to go away. BYU fans have had enough incidents to desire it going away themselves. And we would like it to go away. I would like to know, what fan base DOESN'T want it to go away and WANTS it to STAY? One thing that's for sure, it makes the fans of the team without the player hate it more than the respective opponent likes it.

After the Jalen Davis incident at Wisconsin, Bobby Wagner tweeted that was why he doesn't like college football.

Aggie_CEE wrote: ↑

September 16th, 2018, 3:44 pm

Either way, I wish they would change the rule to not have an automatic ejection from the game. Both of those hits IMO should not warrant an ejection.

This was the change I hoped to see in the off-season. And the strict penalties for targeting sure don’t seem to be lessening the frequency of these situations. I’d almost argue that it’s just giving the refs more opportunities to influence the game’s outcome and they’re calling it more often than they should.

Maybe they could hold them out for a quarter or a half if they can’t separate targeting from targeting with intent to injure.

I hate the inconsistency. When you see Davis get ejected or McKay Brady about few years ago and then you see his like the one JoJo Shuster laid on Leavitt at USC, or the ones like the MSU player had go unpunished it is frustrating.

The first when for Utah was a running back getting to the second level. What is defenseless? He did got helmet to helmet so I get the ejection, but it's hard to argue he was defenseless


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My view on second hit is the defensive player’s helmet did contact the QB’s face mask resulting in the QB’s helmet moving on contact and eventually falling off. As far as targeting, I’ve given up on trying to figure out what is and isn’t other than it seems to be too subjective and not in our favor since instituted so hopefully we start regressing to the mean over the next few years and have more calls in our favor.

Football must do something about head injuries. I don't see them softening the rule. If anything, it will become more stringent. Application of the rule has been very inconsistent for sure.

Does anybody know where I can find clips of those plays or rewatch the game? I was at the game and I thought the first one was a good call based on the rules, but I couldn’t really tell on the second one.

I watched the game with some Ute friends of mine who live down here in Little Utah. Both targeting calls were highly suspect IMHO, especially the first one, the 2nd one even though there was some H to H contact, it was inadvertent as all three players were falling down. Something needs to be done about it, it's WAY too subjective.

I get why they were called targeting and agree with the calls based off the current implementation of the rule. With that said, I think it was crap and made me hate football a little bit. It's pretty lame those kids were ejected for those hits. In many instances given that exact situation unfolding I don't know you make the hit/tackle without your helmet leading. Having your head in front is the natural body movement for tackling someone.

Murkymerk wrote: ↑

September 17th, 2018, 9:54 am

Does anybody know where I can find clips of those plays or rewatch the game? I was at the game and I thought the first one was a good call based on the rules, but I couldn’t really tell on the second one.

All I can find on watchespn is the skycam stream. Here it is:

http://www.espn.com/watch/player?catego ... id=3436041

Murkymerk wrote: ↑

September 17th, 2018, 9:54 am

Does anybody know where I can find clips of those plays or rewatch the game? I was at the game and I thought the first one was a good call based on the rules, but I couldn’t really tell on the second one.

Here's the two clips being referencing. Both players were ejected for these hits and had 15 yard penalties. The 2nd video here with the hit on the QB negated an interception by Utah on 3rd down. Washington went on to score that drive instead and made the score 21-7. It was a real game changer.

swishh_15 wrote: ↑

September 17th, 2018, 10:36 am

Murkymerk wrote: ↑

September 17th, 2018, 9:54 am

Does anybody know where I can find clips of those plays or rewatch the game? I was at the game and I thought the first one was a good call based on the rules, but I couldn’t really tell on the second one.

Here's the two clips being referencing. Both players were ejected for these hits and had 15 yard penalties. The 2nd video here with the hit on the QB negated an interception by Utah on 3rd down. Washington went on to score that drive instead and made the score 21-7. It was a real game changer.

Thanks! After watching them, they both look like targeting to me. Fotu lowered his head at the last second to lead with the crown. The contact didn’t seem too forceful, but that’s only because Anai already had Browning moving backwards. Even if they didn’t call targeting on Fotu, it should have been roughing the passer on him, which would have negated the interception anyway.