I do have a legit question, for someone who knows the answer

Let me say, off the top, that I do not believe official calls cost us the game. Obviously, the zebras blew a call that hurt the Aggies on the long (should have been) TD run when they called him out at the 11 and he clearly did not step out. They missed a few other calls - both ways - but overall I thought it was a pretty well called game.

The question I have is about the targeting call on A&M they overturned during our last TD drive (I believe). This was the one where an Aggie defender smacked one of our receivers after he had dropped a pass downfield.

I know that they review “targeting” penalties and have the discretion to overturn that particular ruling if replay does not support it. I think that is a good process.

However, regardless of whether that was targeting - or not - it CLEARLY was hitting a defenseless receiver. I watched the replay on the mammoth screen right in front of me at JerryWorld 3 or 4 times as they contemplated it on review, and you could see our guy drop the pass, then their defender took a couple of steps and accelerated into him. That’s a classic definition of “hitting a defenseless player” in a passing context. However, I did not see what I thought was “targeting” in terms of spearing him in the helmet.

So, I thought the review would result in them removing the targeting, and allowing the defender to remain in the game, but still enforcing the hit on a defenseless receiver penalty. However, they reversed the call and there was NO penalty at all.

Are there any officials reading the board that can break down these issues a little bit for me and everyone else on the board?

That was strange it should have still been a penalty in my opinion.
The call that cost the hogs was a holding on the Aggies on Kirk’s kickoff return that for him to the outside. They let the shirt rug go all day on receivers and we get called late. Nance was grabbed and held it it wasn’t called.
We are the step kids in the SEC.

It was targeting. No question. But, though I tend to be old fashioned in alot of ways, I think MORE targeting calls should be made. That is, if they/we care about the future of this game we all love. I think your reading of the rule is correct.

That hold was soooo obvious, it just burns me that they called the one on Curl. If you’re gonna let’em play…then be consistent.

Notch that one with the Skipper trip.

I would give up this contract. I don’t care that its in Jerry world. Its in Texas. I want A&M in Fayetteville every other year. Enough of this. Let the contract go.

There isn’t a penalty for hitting a defenseless player. That term only applies to targeting. There is a penalty for unnecessary roughness but it didn’t apply in this case because you can hit a player once he touches ball, until the play is blown dead.

But they could have called a late hit WITH targeting and overturned the targeting. That would have left the late hit as a penalty.

I knew after hell froze over and we benefited from an official’s error, that the rest of the game would be filled with make up calls. I believe that is what happened overall, regardless of what happened on the targeting call,no call. As far as that play, I think it was classic unnecessary roughness and not targeting. Either way, it cost us.

But they could have called a late hit WITH targeting and overturned the targeting. That would have left the late hit as a penalty.
[/quote]As I’ve thought about it, after posting the question, I believe what happened is that the officials made a mistake by NOT calling a late hit with targeting, then reviewing the targeting.

I believe, by rule, if they don’t call the late hit on the field, then review cannot ADD that call - even if justified. In it’s own way, that mistake was as egregious as the Aggie not stepping out of bounds. What was more clear to me, watching from the stands, was that it was a late hit. I didn’t see right off if it was targeting, or not. So I thought that they had called a late hit with targeting. Apparently, they only called the targeting part.


Not a late hit because play was live. Whistle hadn’t blown because ball hadn’t hit the ground. At least that’s the way I remembered it. I addressed that with my first response.

If I remember right, on that play, the Aggie got up and stood over our receiver, no doubt talking smack. It could have been called taunting as well. I think more of those need to be called. I understand letting players play, but I guess I’m from the old baseball school that you don’t show up your opponent (you don’t flip your bat, you trot around the bases on a homer, etc., and Heaven help you if you show up the umpire). Just play. Smack talking is always a part of it, but celebrate your big hit with your teammates, don’t stand over your conquered foe and talk.

BTW, I thought it was targeting.