Hayes' targeting ejection

[LDopaPDX]

Once again, Big Sky refs prove themselves incompetent to make simple calls.. Glad to see the Spokesman Review make note of what an atrocious call it was.

He went so low his helmet was only about two feet off the ground. The receiver was the one who led with his head. How on Earth was Hayes supposed to play this any safer? Against an upright opponent, he strikes him below the knees.

All in all, it felt like the refs had a bone to pick with Eastern yesterday. My goodness, every 50/50 call went NAU's way. From what seemed like a thousand penalties on our DBs, to a clear fumble that didn't even get reviewed, a more even break on officiating might have made this a much wider margin. There isn't a single call I could point to stand say "that was utter bullshit," (with the exception of the targeting call) but it just seemed like every close call went against the road team.

 

[EWU98]

Totally agree with your view of that call. Saw it and was like "Damn how much lower does he need to go?" Hopefully it gets appealed. Not sure about that process. Didn't see much of the game prior to the 4th, but home field advantage....

 

[LDopaPDX]

Totally agree with your view of that call. Saw it and was like "Damn how much lower does he need to go?" Hopefully it gets appealed. Not sure about that process. Didn't see much of the game prior to the 4th, but home field advantage....

In fairness to the refs, targeting is such a subjective rule that it's hard to get right. The NCAA needs to clarify that ejections only occur if a player goes high to an upright opponent. If they aren't willing to make that change, then turnabout is fairplay and an offensive player who runs into a tackler head first should also be subject to penalties and ejections.

I feel like we live in an instant relay world where every slight movement can be criticized, and it ignores the fact that D1 football is played at a fast speed. If a tackler misjudges a lunge at an offensive player, he may be ejected for simply being a fraction of a second off and hitting with his helmet instead of his shoulder. If refs want to mkeep this as a penalty, so be it, but it certainly doesn't warrant an ejection if there was no malicious intent or poor tackling form.

 

[Seattle Eagle]

Agreed. Horrendous call.

 

[clawman1]

When I saw the play live I immediately though Targeting and when I saw the replay this morning in the Flagstaff hotel I thought the same. VERY obvious within the description of the rule it is targeting. I do not like the rule either but it was definitely targeting. I though the refs were fair throughout the game in fact I saw a few calls they could have made against us that they did not. The Eagles need to play smarter but I like the enthusiasm.