In an effort get ranting about stuff that has nothing to do with Georgia's team and what they can do to improve, ect., I need to get this off my chest about the targeting rule.
The NCAA needs to tell Rogers Redding to kiss their ass and stop worrying about the officials' feelings. That is the source of not overturning the penalty on the targeting calls. That is the only reason. Either there is a penalty or their isn't. Yet Redding was able to convince the NCAA member schools that you can't have a replay official over turning judgement penalties from the booth. Oh, you can say it didn't happen, but the penalty still stands.
In my mind, this is a far more dangerous to "the game" than players celebrating. This goes beyond player safety. In fact, the rule, while good in that it can help with player safety, as applied is probably not helping, because it is getting called extremely inconsistently.
Ray McGuiness told CBS that Ray Drew's call would have been overturned if he'd wrapped up the QB or just held up a little. Really? Getting pushed down (note: not hit in the head or with a player by his head or blindsided, for that matter) isn't safer than having a 300 lb man put you on the dirt with his full weight. How does an official or a replay official tell if a player 'held up' a little? On Ramik's penalty, the official who was less than five yards and looking directly at the play unfold in front of him never reached for his flag. The official who threw the flag was 20 yards away. And nealy three seconds after the play was over.
Then to still penalize the team for a penalty that gets over turned on replay is asinine. Just asinine. The flag on Ramik changed the whole complexion of the game. Yes, he stayed in the game, but Vandy gets a first down and fifteen yards for free on a non-penalty when they hadn't converted on fourth down .
Think about that.
The schools or conferences need to step up and fix that. Tell Redding to shut up. The game officials are prone to error and that's fine and all. I can accept that. I can't accept a rule that gives great latitude to officials, that is reviewable, but still doesn't remedy all the error.
That is asinine.
-SEC Statement on targeting rule (Emmerson)