Two changes to targeting that NEED to be implemented . . .


  • Next: Holiday Bowl vs Northwestern – Mon 12/31 4pm – FS1
    • #78459
      8

      UteThunder
      Ute Fan
      @utethunder

      1. In order for there to be an ejection, the call must be CONFIRMED rather than just “the call stands” as happened with Chase today. How in the world can you eject/suspend a player when you can’t even confirm that they committed the foul?

      2. Allow for some incidental contact, even with a lowering of the crown of the helmet. So many times we see a glancing blow get called targeting and it was just a good tackle that ended up with just a tiny bit of helmet to helmet contact.

    • #78473
      5

      Distantute
      Ute Fan
      @distantute

      The ejection should only be for the current quarter and next.  This was a 4qtr ejection.  Entirely too punitive.  

      • #78488
        1

        UteThunder
        Ute Fan
        @utethunder

        I agree, the ejection/suspension needs to be more uniform. Why should Chase miss basically an entire game but someone who commits the same foul on the last play of the 4th quarter only misses one half of the next game?

    BACK TO TOP

    You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    Utah Utes Message Board Forums Utah Utes Sports Football Two changes to targeting that NEED to be implemented . . .

    This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  UteThunder 3 weeks, 6 days ago.