Amani Jones Targeting Call
- Thread starter Hawk1960
- Start date
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
Nelson from Wisconsin can dangerously close to targeting on, I think Hoks, against Iowa with a very similar hit
Replays confirmed his hit was safe, and Jones as well.
Nelson ran out of luck in the Nebraska game. He did get a targeting violation and as such is slated to miss the first half of the Michigan game.
That could really give Harbaugh something to exploit. I don't know how deep Wiscy is back there.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
Thawki
Well-Known Member
I believe if you hit another player in the head or neck area with the shoulder, and he is deemed a defenseless receiver, then it is a targeting penalty.
I think the officials determined that this is what happened.
ICHawk24
Well-Known Member
OSU sent it to the B1G, but the B1G never said they'd review it.
There isn't an appeal process:
https://www.hawkcentral.com/story/s...moss-get-big-ten-defensive-honors/1565123002/
The Big Ten on Monday told the Register that there is no appeals process for targeting suspensions.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
Then the suspension of next game needs to be eliminated from the rule if there isn't a process for something that includes review and and can still be called wrong. Now that there are at least two examples of humans on the field being wrong and humans in the booth getting it wrong as well.
NoBeer
Well-Known Member
You would be wrong.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
But they did review it and confirmed the refs were wrong. Can be reviewed, but not officially overturned
NoBeer
Well-Known Member
That's not what the OP said though. OP asked if there was an appeal process. I said no. You called me wrong.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
Technically speaking you can ask to have them review it, just nothing may or will come of it. The url to the example was given in the initial comment above.
NoBeer
Well-Known Member
You seem more interested in being pedantic than the answer to the question. We can't appeal the call. Jones isn't playing the first half this coming Saturday. Nothing else matters.
pythagoras
Well-Known Member
kicker22
Well-Known Member
In a day and age in which everything seems reviewable it doesn't surprise me, in the least, that something can be reviewed, but not officially overturned. Just plain dumb.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
Nothing different than in a game when they get one wrong, but the ruling is not reviewable. I got a great idea; lets use replay to help see to it that the game is being called correctly, but then add components that either cannot be reviewable or that impact future games. Let's make it reviewable to determine whether or not the hit warrants an ejection and make the player sit the next half, but let's not put a safeguard in place to allow the player/program an opportunity for a third party to reverse the call if they feel the ejection was unwarranted.
I have no problem with putting the control in the hands of the officials to eject a player from the current game as it pertains to the game they're calling, but feel it's absolutely ridiculous to not allow it to be appealed or over ruled when it's directly impacts the next game called by a completely different crew. In any instance in which a player is ejected for targeting, the play should be reviewed independently the following week to determine if suspension is necessary.
So if the league overturned an OSU suspension last year there is precedence, and a glimmer of hope. I don't know what a defensive player is supposed to do when a receiver is coming straight at him other than try and turn away, which he did. All this happens in a millisecond.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
The call and the review were both wrong. That was a good hit and he kept his head up on the tackle. See what you hit. He did.