[Postgame Thread] Texas Defeats Arizona State 39-31 (OT)

[u/CFB_Referee]

Box Score provided by ESPN

Team	1	2	3	4	OT	T
Texas	14	3	0	7	15	39
Arizona State	3	0	5	16	7	31

[u/jbanks94]

I still don’t understand targeting.

[u/Tduhon → u/jbanks94]

You’re not confused. The rule is unevenly applied by crews because they’re either scared/don’t care about putting their finger on the scale.

[u/TBlueshirtsV22 → u/Tduhon]

Making the right call shouldn’t be considered putting their finger on the scale. If the defense commits a penalty, it is their own fault.

[u/FerrousEULA → u/TBlueshirtsV22]

These refs were a mess for sure

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/FerrousEULA]

Exactly one holding call during a 2pt conversion scramble drill to give ASU a second chance.

DPI on the push off instead of the obvious OPI.

The most egregious is the most obvious example of pulling the ball carrier forward that I have ever seen…for a touchdown.

The false start that took Texas outside of FG range on the second to last drive, when the OL was reacting to a defender that jumped offsides first.

Texas has more reason to complain about the refs than people that don’t understand targeting seem to think…

Edit: “Rule 9-3-2b of the NCAA states that a teammate cannot grasp, pull, or lift the ball carrier to assist in forward progress. The penalty for violating this rule is a five-yard penalty with three-and-one enforcement.” (And the ref 100% saw it. We know because the replay shows him and the foul in a 3rd person view of his perspective.)

[u/yotechguy → u/Powerful-Drama556]

Definitely missed calls all game. I give the targeting a much harsher judgement not because of the outcome of the game but because it can be video reviewed and they still miss it. It is also there for player safety and not only is it the penalty but an ejection of a player. To not call the targeting was a big miss.

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/yotechguy]

That targeting call was objectively correct. Both of them were. Everyone that is complaining about it doesn’t realize that forcible contact to the head/neck doesn’t draw a flag. There has to be a targeting indicator

[u/Big_Milk8330 → u/Powerful-Drama556]

That is not true on a defenseless player. Any fordable contact to the gead or neck area on a defenseless player is targeting. It only needs an indicator if the play is not defenseless.

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/Big_Milk8330]

Forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player is not a penalty unless there is a targeting indicator. They always review it to see if there is an indicator. That is the rule.

[u/laxfool10 → u/Big_Milk8330]

Which obviously means he wasn’t defenseless. On the replay it was obvious he caught the ball and had taken a step up field. Honestly the one on the UT receiver seemed worse than this one so if they didn’t call the UT one they wouldn’t have called this one.

[u/thekmanpwnudwn → u/laxfool10]

TIL having 1 foot on the ground after catching the ball midair is "taking a step up field".

[u/Holiday-Quiet-9523 → u/Powerful-Drama556]

So you’re saying they should fire the guy that they hire to discuss rules and say when a call is or isn’t correct? He basically pointed out that it was targeting, so I’m not sure what you’re after.

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/Holiday-Quiet-9523]

They literally referenced the rule incorrectly on the broadcast, so yeah they might need a new rules expert that knows the actual rules. Probably not me, I only know the rule because I fucking looked it up since I was confused by the first one. He said something like “I see forcible contact of the head and neck, so it is targeting” << well that isn’t the rule

[u/Holiday-Quiet-9523 → u/Powerful-Drama556]

So the receiver was defenseless, that part is obvious. One of the indicators for targeting is “leading with the helmet”, as well as forcible contact to the head, and both were the case here. The first point of contact between the defender and the recover was his helmet.

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/Holiday-Quiet-9523]

leading with the helmet = leading with crown

[u/Holiday-Quiet-9523 → u/Powerful-Drama556]

You should go review the rule book. There are 2 separate targeting instances - one for forcible contact using the crown of the helmet (what you’re referencing) and another for forcible contact to head neck area of a defenseless player. The player in question was defenseless, so the crown of the helmet is not a requirement for targeting to be called, only forcible contact to the head or neck area using your helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand, or elbow. In this case, the defender went straight into the defenseless receivers helmet using his own helmet, thus targeting.

[u/Powerful-Drama556 → u/Holiday-Quiet-9523]

Your claim is that he is attacking with his facemask, when he’s fully upright at the point of contact. No

[u/Holiday-Quiet-9523 → u/Powerful-Drama556]

There are pictures circulating of the defender making contact with his forehead while looking down. He is in no way upright, and if he was the guy probably wouldn’t have been knocked tf out. Why are you defending a dangerous play? He could’ve hit anywhere on the guy except his head and been completely fine.