Read the full story here
I've seen a lot worse not called targeting..
Looked like targeting to me, but, yes, the calls sometimes seem rather subjective and/or capricious.
Go, Dawgs!
Was surprised the flag wasn’t thrown at time of contact. Struck defenseless player with crown of helmet. As a d back, Ducking your head like that on any tackle is poor technique and a good way to break your neck. You are supposed to have your head up and see the man you are tackling.
After re-watch of this play...I would have to say first, the receiver was Not a defenseless player…his motions, to "duck and cover", is a football move and show his action as protection of his reception and attempt to advance the play...KJ appeared to attack the ball to break up the play or dislodge the ball....a bang, bang action for sure....but not a true targeting…this is tackle football and more often than not, this was a no call to me. If officials are looking for helmet placement or contact....then targeting can be called on practically every series .... we can come up with something better for type of call
Excellent point about receiver not being defenseless. He clearly had established possession and was making his way up field. This rule is so subjective that it’s maddening and it is just pure chance when it goes for review. Defense had to definitely buckle down with so many starters leaving the game.
but Caleb downs wasn’t targeting?
The view I kept getting sure looked like the shoulder hit first and the head was collateral, but whatever…
