I thought that could have been called targeting as well, which just proves to me

Sign up, and CougarBoard will remember which categories you want to view. Sign up

Report problem with this ad

Jan 2, 2025
8:36:21am

NOCAL_YFAN All-American

I thought that could have been called targeting as well, which just proves to me

that the refs were avoiding making targeting calls unless they were blatant, because of how impactful the penalty is.

Report problem with this ad

NOCAL_YFAN

Bio page: NOCAL_YFAN
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Last login: Jan 4, 2025
Total posts: 19,969 (11 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

There were two potential targeting calls in the 4th quarter of the ASU game, one by each team. On the ASU INT, there is

Spiff SequelTrilogyFan

Jan 2, 8:19am

It would have negated the interception.

TN_Coug

Jan 2, 8:32am

Terry McAulay says likely still ASU INT

squirrelyearl

Jan 2, 8:33am

"at the same time" means bang-bang play and would have negated it.

TN_Coug

Jan 2, 8:35am

"or slightly before"

Spiff

Jan 2, 8:42am

I saw that, but he wrote both things. If watching it back he's still not sure if its same-time or slightly before it

TN_Coug

Jan 2, 8:54am

I think the refs made the right call...it was not targeting.

WJCougar

Jan 2, 8:36am

I thought that could have been called targeting as well, which just proves to me

NOCAL_YFAN

Jan 2, 8:36am

Would have been ASU ball since they had possession when the play occurred

BYUCLA

Jan 2, 9:20am

Report problem with this ad

Posting on CougarBoard

In order to post, you will need to either sign up or log in.

Report problem with this ad