This targeting call was reversed last night (GT)

[L A M P]

At this point, I think ACC officials are just trolling.

 

[JHallCanes]

But Moten was?

 

[HurricaneAce07]

At this point, I think ACC officials are just trolling.

Amari Carter would be THRIVING this season with all of these overturned targeting calls...

 

[mr.h]

 

[Essex Cane]

But Moten was?

 

[KCane]

Calls like this over the season are why the ACC let the media rules expert listen in on reviews for the first time last night. It didn’t seem to help provide any clarity in this case. They just claimed they couldn’t tell from the footage if he hit within the 6 inch radius at the top of the helmet (the crown) as defined by the targeting rule.

 

[Hoyacane1620]

Interesting note on the call reviews last night -

the ESPN "review expert" was permitted to be on the calls with the booth. He would then come back to the broadcast and report was was discussed. I forget the details on this call but it was long..... Matt Barrie and Dan Mullen didn't understand the reversal , either

 

[Cylo]

At this point, I think ACC officials are just trolling.

We saw this play live during the live thread and we all thought it was targeting. I don't know what targeting is. They call targeting on plays that are clearly not targeting and then they call no targeting on plays that are clearly targeting. Biggest difference is if this was a Miami game, the whole country would be talking about it and how the ACC refs love Miami but since its not....nobody cares

 

[Southern Oz]

I went back and watched the Cal game. Wes’ on that last drive definitely was, moten was not, but they are all over the place with these calls.

 

[OldhamA]

To be fair that isn't targeting.

It's attempted murder.

 

[Cylo]

I went back and watched the Cal game. Wes’ on that last drive definitely was, moten was not, but they are all over the place with these calls.

Neither was targeting

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

I went back and watched the Cal game. Wes’ on that last drive definitely was, moten was not, but they are all over the place with these calls.

Wes was not- he didn’t hit with 6” circle on crown of helmet as defined in the rules. The rule change was supposed to help remove subjectivity and I think it is better now. That said, it easily could have been called the other way. If it had, we likely lose that game. Fun times this season would have been over really early due to atrocious defense. We tried to say it was jet lag and give Guidry a pass, but now we can see it was a big red flag.

 

[QuattroCane]

Yeah, that was pretty funny. Even the guy in the booth were speechless how that wasn’t called targeting. It’s pretty comical.

 

[LPK2006]

I didn't see this. Gotta be F'ing kidding me.

 

[BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati]

The only thing that makes any sense to me is that the dude getting tackled’s head was also moving downward in the direction of the tackler’s helmet and the tackler couldn’t react. That’s reallllllly a stretch. It’s also probably not in the rule. That said, it’s fvckin targeting man. If not, what is?

 

[Southern Oz]

Wes was not- he didn’t hit with 6” circle on crown of helmet as defined in the rules. The rule change was supposed to help remove subjectivity and I think it is better now. That said, it easily could have been called the other way. If it had, we likely lose that game. Fun times this season would have been over really early due to atrocious defense. We tried to say it was jet lag and give Guidry a pass, but now we can see it was a big red flag.

I feel like I don’t know the rule anymore. It doesn’t matter now, but to me he launched, hit with the crown, although that is debatable and hit to the head/neck area.

I’m ok for it not to be, but last year he is gone and on that same week I saw a Clemson LB thrown out for way less.

Anyway, the rule and the way it is officiated is a disaster

 

[Gransapo]

 

[TheUuuuu]

Someone make an Amari targeting highlights video.