2016 Utah vs. BYU - Targeting Ejections
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 січ 2025
- University of Utah vs. BYU
September 10, 2016
(3:52 - 3rd) Williams, Troy pass incomplete to Simpkins,Demari (NACUA, Kai), PENALTY BYU targeting (NACUA, Kai) 15 yards to the BYU43, 1ST DOWN UTAH,
(3:52 - 3rd) BYU Penalty, unsportsmanlike conduct (15 Yards) to the BYU 28 for a 1ST down
(3:52 - 3rd) Troy Williams pass intercepted Francis Bernard return for no gain to the BYU 28 BYU Penalty, targeting (Austin McChesney) to the BYU 3
Just make the game two hand touch. Good lord. Barely any head contact at all. Mostly to the chest/shoulder area. On the first one the receiver has the ball when contacted and he ducks into the hit. That both guys got ejected is unreal. BYU was as classy as it gets over those calls.
Tony C if the football game was two hand touch then nobody would ever watch the game again
Byu was classy? They got the dirtiest team award that year 😂
Thats what the NFL did with QBs - if you sack a QB its roughing now.. if you touch the QB its roughing... if you give the QB a mean look or even wink- it was roughing the QBs feelings.
They even got an unsportsmanlike conduct 😂
What was Nacua supposed to do on the first one?
Throw punches? Or does he just save that for bowl games?
What a butthurt Utah fan. The first one is clean as can be.
good question he's supposed to anticipate the guy's going to lower his head. maybe teach these guys to lead with the shoulder and aim for the back left or right but not center
Not come flying in like a train off the rails? I disagree with the announcer, the defender should have a responsibility to ensure that his actions don't put the attacker in serious danger. If he's coming in at that speed, he's responsible for whatever happens, even if the receiver lowers himself.
Stephen Malacaria you're an idiot
This is a great example of why we need to do away with conference officials and go with NCAA nation-wide officiating crews as well as do an overhaul over the differing rules and regulations so that they are uniform nationally. This is hurting the integrity of the game. You need two teams to battle each other, not the other team and it's conference officiating crew.
FCATS! CLEAR AS DAY BIASED DEAD WRONG CALLS!
I was at this game, and I remember thinking these hits were targeting at the time. Having watched this 6 years later, both hits were clearly not targeting. Coming from a Utes fan.
Easy to think it at the time. I'd hate to see Utah players get kicked out because of a bad call by refs. I want BYU to play against the best the opponents have to offer
1st one wasn't targeting. He led with his shoulder but the WR went lower then the Safety thought he was going to be
Doesnt matter. Rulse state "helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or
shoulder"
I guess you know more than the fox experts… Ha ha
Nic Barney Yes it does matter and it should. if the receiver doesn't lower his head at the last second, there wouldn't be head contact. Therefore the defender "targeted" the chest not the head
Mikey114411 Unfortunately, the rule is very specific, intent doesn't matter, and the referee was correct. The second was worse than the first, neither was really blatant, but it is consistent with the rule as it is written. Should the rule be revisited and revised? Absolutely! But for now, it is what it is.
seamus1956 Intent does matter according to the rule
It might sound ridiculous but there should be a rule for those moments where the wr lowers the fucking head. It's simply stupid that the defensive gets a flag.
I agree, offensive players (especially RBs) need to be penalized for dropping their heads
Absolutely spot on. In Australian football, players can now be suspended for ducking there heads
Poe Moe I agree with you guys bit just to add more understand when you drop your shoulder, so does your head. the equipment doesn't help with that problem either. it just happens. when I played( WR, some HB, CB, and Safety) we learned about this... it sucks but it just happens unfortunately
Johnathan Simmons it is still possible to keep your eyes up though. My coaches always said don't hit what you can't see
Niko Yochum I didn't say it wasn't. said it's not as easy basically. especially when you are actually in game play and probally about to take a massive hit. it's just natural to basically curl up. also anatomy can also show further difficulty doing so. had to do practices just for this cause every practice.
I am not a fan of either team. But those players should not, again, SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN EJECTED. Was incidental contact. Looks like the REF's were in favor of Utah.
john Magill mmm, agreed
john Magill the pac 12 referees are the worst referees in all 10 conferences
Clearly favored utah. Took byu's starting safety and backup safety away in 2 plays
The guy who made the interception on the second one transferred to Utah
Referees should face fines and suspensions for gross errors in judgment.
Especially, if they are cheating for money. 💰💰💰 😡
Ohio state fan here and watching how terrible of a call and officiating was done during this play. Ruling it an incomplete pass was the first red flag!!! First bad call because he clearing had possession of it during the slomo replay. The hit was justifiable for the reason of him gripping the football to try and not fumble it. The target of contact was the football only slightly allowing his helmet to hit against the face mask. Blunt force was directed to his chest, thus creating a fumble. This was a really good moment changing play. Hit was tough, hard, but it was good Refs screwed BYU out of this game, I believe how they called the game clearly must of pissed off BYU having to battle both Utah and the refs. This was horrible officiating to watch as a fan of college football, Bias officiating.
refs shouldnt be allowed to touch anybody since they dont like being touched smh
did anyone see the hit in the Stanford game that wasn't ruled targeting but was like the most obvious call of all time?
YES
Neither play is targeting. Neither player launched with their helmet to the head or neck area. The first one, the BYU defender lowered his head and body before the Utah receiver. If anything, the receiver lowered his head into the BYU player. It's clear, these refs were out for BYU. There were many more questionable calls during this game.
The first "targeting" is just as much the receivers fault as the defender. Safety's job is to break up a pass by hitting the ball out if he can't get there on time, so if you curl over into the blow you will get rocked "high".
Absolutely
The rule reads: "No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)" no matter how you try to argue it, this is the way the rule is written. It's been written this way since these guys have been playing college football. No excuse for any of them.
I know, you're next argument is to bring "intent" into the equation. Well, intent isn't written anywhere in the rule. So the LB's good intentions are not taken into consideration. What happened? There was contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player with the shoulder. As the rule says, this is targeting. carve it up any way you like, the contact is obvious when you look at the video and the rule states that this kind of contact is targeting.
Play the ball, not the player.
what qualifies the WR as defenseless? seemed from the footage that he sees the contact coming and tucks to protect chest area/the ball. therefore if you are looking at the meaning of defenseless as a word, he isnt "defenseless" as he has taken action to protect himself/something in his possession?
But i definitely do not know the rules so maybe the definition of defenseless is different in in the rule book?
tall82
Just because he sees the contact coming doesn't mean he's no longer defenseless. He has to have time to change direction and avoid being tackled in order to be considered a ball carrier. Reactions do not qualify as protection. Having time to avoid the contact is considered to be enough time to protect yourself.
Reactions and reflexes (muscle memory) happen before a person really has time to think about what's happening or about to happen. The receiver tucking his head is just muscle memory/reflex
4:01 this is what I like about Sitake, he loves his players so much he gets fired up when one of them gets ejected for a clean play.
unless you're a giraffe, there will be some helmet to helmet contact on most tackles. neither of the players hit the receivers with the crown of their helmet anyway. bad calls.
Both calls were incredibly bad
The second one is correct. Dude doesnt even have the ball and isnt even close and takes a shot to the helmet
I don't like either if these teams, but both of these were horrible. Both were shoulder pad to the chest/shoulder area, and neither lead with the crown of the helmet.
BAM_Deadstroke you don't have to lead with the crown of helmet
So I could lead with the back of my helmet then for targeting? no. there are specific guidlines and rules against leading with the crown of the helmet.
you can lead with facemask. you'll break your neck but you can do it, there are no objections for leading with facemask.
By rule, every targeting foul is reviewed by the instant replay official. Up to this point, the replay official's role has been to verify whether the forcible contact was WITH THE CROWN OF THE HELMET or was struck at the head or neck area of a defenseless player.
Exactly a facemask graze is not against the rules otherwise the lineman in the trenches would be thrown out of the game everytime.
That first call is infuriating. There is nothing the defender could have done differently/better. That was a clean hit and a great play. The WR lowering his head while bracing for contact caused the helmet to helmet contact and it was still minimal. BYU got fucked.
Being 2021, say what you will but the rule changes to protect players have led to less head trauma. This game was four and a half years ago. Players and coaches have made changes to the approach of hitting. The hunger to watch football at all levels hasn't waned due to it. The coffers of the NCAA and NFL are doing just fine.
These refs are really judgmental to the Utah Side
When aren't they the pac-12 is giving them their paychecks. If Utah wins they have a better record which means they go to a better bowl game getting the conference more money meaning the conference can afford to pay the refs slightly more
The onfield officials in the game were Big-XII officials.
TheZombieWolf94 they should cause Utah sucks
And when stuff like money becomes the problem, it makes me feel like Football is slowly dying for America and my interest.
Uintabri after Lavell Edwards left the cougars sucked even though I’m a utah fan I’m saying that
Not only is the first one *NOT* targeting, the receiver fumbled the ball after securing it and making a 'football move'. Oh well... GO CU!
No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)
Okay, thanks for clarifying why it was not targeting.
You're welcome, I'm glad you can see the rule now and understand exactly why it was targeting. I guess I should check to see whether you're literate next time.
It is a horribly written rule and enforced stupidly. I know why the NCAA is doing this. They are scared of lawsuits. But I am at a loss on how a defensive player should initiate contact on many plays. The first one is a great example. The offensive player put his head down and lead with the head. Maybe he is the one that initiated contact with the head. I think that is how one could look at it. I think the targeting rule could ruin football.
I don't like the rule but it was called correctly. The receiver barely has one foot on the ground when the hit is delivered. That's considered a "defenseless receiver". Officials never rule the receiver to have possession if it's a bang bang play like in this play.
The disgusting thing is the Utah fans cheering at being bailed out by bad officiating. That's not football anymore, that's hatred. I hate when fans have no class and no love for football.
Ryndan Riley Completely agree. Both "victims" acted like babies. Pretending to be hurt for the sake of a reaction. Despicable.
So...how about the QB learns not to leave his receiver out to die?
I'm a UofM fan and I was recommended this so I have no feeling towards either team but Utah has some one sided refs
Absolutely bullshit call!!! I'm not a fan for either school but that was a clean hit! If a hit like that can't happen in a game then might as well not have football anymore. What is the world coming to.
It looks somewhat bad in real time. Calling the flag on the field is defensible. But reviewing and upholding the call was, and is, inexcusable
naccua is in the locker room mcchesney walks in naccua says sup bro how were you trown out he says targeting like you
When a coach take his team off the field during a Bowl Game will the change the rule?
The quarterback is the one who should be penalized for targeting. Throwing the ball at defenseless receivers is really dangerous and should not be a part of the game.
Brian Bethea Could the same argument not be made for players on defense? That the game is too fast for tacklers to determine where to tackle on point of impact for safety reasons.
totally agree! Although, every receiver is considered defenseless when they are catching the ball. So you're absolutely right, the QB should not be throwing the ball to a defenseless player. They should never throw the ball in football.
So, Parker, since you are such a fan of following the rules exactly as written. Should the refs be throwing flags every play for holding, etc? Every play there is holding being done, some hands to the face, the refs need to not only enforce the rules, but, enforce them using their JUDGEMENT.
Mr. Creamy Twinkie For You
Omg are you kidding me? Another stupid statement? If the receiver is wide open the QB is gonna make that pass there can't be a rule because his play is instantaneous, plus it's part of the damn game to get hit, don't wanna get hit? Don't play or just fall down if you catch the ball. It's a contact sport not knitting.
I was interested of the final outcome of this game, and I found that UTAH won 20-19, but did BYU missed an extrapoint with :25 left?
Ik this like three years later butttt BYU went for 2 if u haven’t already found out 😂. Taysom hill got sacked immediately on a designed run play. Haunts me to this day
im so sick of seeing b.s. targeting calls in college football. they review so many calls and you can clearly see no intent and they still eject kids. let them play
These were the worst two "targeting" calls I think I've ever seen. Both were just good hits.
both of those were bs fouls, seems like utah had paid some refs before the game. the second hit was nowhere close to a target, heck neither were, horrible calls
Take off the blue goggles. The 2nd hit was on his face mask, and totally defenseless. Even the first call was, by the book, targeting.
"Targeting and Initiating Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6).
(A.R. 9-1-4- I-VI) "
blue goggles? plz tell me what that is, cuz i am def not a byu fan, it was slight contact even the professionals say so, they were barely hit, college football has become a wus sport, neither was a target, first dude led with shoulder and second dudes facemask barely hit the guy
False the receiver went low on the first ejection and was ready to take the hit there fore you can look up the rule book all you want but regardless or not that is not a targeting. Call you all you want but it is not an ejection. The second one wasn't an ejection either a face mask graze is not an ejection.
You don't know what you're talking about.
@@Jonny.B. qweryyuioooopppppp>>ppppppppppppppplppppplppppppppppplllllpppppppppppp
I do like how the refs screwed up twice on the player's number for the first one before they got it right. Makes that call look real legit alright (even though I personally thought it didn't look like targeting).
Second one was a real weak call.
Making football into a sissy game....it's a shame
With butthurt Refs, yes.
Truth
You going to carry the coffins from the CTE? Your compassion is straight from the ghetto.
BS
The first was him trying to make a play. The 2nd was closer to a target, but was more just a hard block.
5:41 The BYU player sent Sitake flying
For those that say the first targeting call was correct, because he was a defenseless player are incorrect. NCAA rule 2-27-14 states: "A receiver attempting to catch a pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself." He clearly had time to protect himself. By letter of the law it was targeting but I agree that this rule is incomplete and needs to changed.
Even the guys upstairs said they were 0-2 on saying it wasn’t targeting refs are so judgementle
32, then 13?? C'mon ref, read the back of his jersey!! I think they can't eject Nacua if they can't even get his number right.
Just take the defense off the field. Receivers and quarterbacks have become Gods, and can't be touched.
Pretty soon the players are going to be wearing high heeled cleats...
Right. Damn it's a contact sport
the best illustration of the bullshit refs can pull when they think a high speed shoulder hit is the same as a player leading with their helmet or launching
This is why football is doomed. Pansy calls like this. The defender did everything he could to keep from injuring the receiver. Football IS a contact sport.
No shit, but refs are blind, hypersensitive and and greedy.
this targeting stuff making football sucks. what's next two hand flags?
So, the announcer said it’s on the quarterback to protect the receiver?
They should've called "targeting" on the QB for throwing that dumb pass.
Thanks for the video, it's nice to be able to come watch the plays again now that I'm cooled off from the BYU loss. I still don't like either call. Neither seemed malicious at all. That said, the first one (Nacua) should have been reversed after the review, and the second one (McChesney) was technically barely targeting, but the flag shouldn't have been thrown in the first place. He barely grazed the face mask. I think the second one requires a rule change and the first one was just a bad call.
I'm watching this while enjoying a big cup of coffee
We are watching the beginning of the end of a sport
No targeting on the part of the BYU player #12.
What was that guys number again?
That coach for BYU Is badass!....thats how ya do it..
Hmmm.....now I'm doubting CF officials ability to make good calls.
I can't be the only one who sees roughing the passer on the second one...
It depends if Nacua targeted but then again the person he was after was not defenceless
if that's targeting why was the hit on torii Hunter from Notre dame not called targeting
Anyone who argues this kind of rule is warranted hasn’t played football at a high level period. The game at high speed consists of countless reactions, not “Choices” any of which could result in head contact.
The targeting penalty covers up for the qb making a mistake. He knows that there is going to be a flag if the ball is thrown high. Back in the day, the qb new that there was no penalty, so he would throw low and save his receiver.
4:34 - the coach gets slapped with an unsportmanlike conduct infraction. That means like no. 12, if that coach gets another unsportsmanlike infraction (the 2nd personal foul) - HE WILL ALSO BE KICKED OUT OF THE BALLGAME!!!!
Most of the time I don't get why people don't form tackle. Like the first one if he form tackled he coulda done a lot more damage to the receiver while being "clean"
The quarterback should be suspended for laying his receiver out to dry.
What is disgraceful and embarrassing about this call is if you have to review something for as long as they did (and it was long) then it's NOT targeting. It shouldn't take but 30 seconds or less if it's that obvious. As others have stated here, if you have to start splitting hairs on the call, then you've got nothing. Get rid of this rule and go back to the old "spearing" rule. Warren Sapp was right - football is a contact sport and everyone playing it knows the risks they take when putting on that uniform - no different from every boxer who steps into the ring. If you're that concerned about the risks, then don't play the game or don't let your kids play it. It's that simple.
The difference is none of these kids see a dime from this. They get an education but you cant use it if your brian is scrambled. I'd rather in college and highschool take a more cautious route on it. The nfl you're making enough money in one year to set yourself up for life. Be smart with it and you'll never have an issue. You're bitching because your quality of entertainment is moderately affected by these calls that a single team might have 2 called on them a year. Here's the thing you completely dont understand about reviews. You have to over rule the original call. And they are instructed to if it's close call it. Then you review the call stands because it isnt clear that it is. And it isnt clear that it isnt targeting. The second one is confirmed because it's a late hit that originates at the head
What Burfict did to AB (NFL) is what you want to remove from the game. But if you’re calling these 2 as targeting you might as well change the game to flag only
The first one was targeting. I would not have called the second one. I think this was before the rules committee said you have to confirm targeting and not just let it stand. There are a lot of hits that can be theoretical targeting and many of them are just incidental collisions. It's not the official's fault, it's a poorly written rule. It says "When in doubt, it's a foul". They changed this rule later because it was so bad that defenses were running out of people, including Utah's defense.
Any football fans wanna tell me what targeting is? I'm English and don't know many of the American football rules? I think it's deliberately using/hitting the players helmet?
AKAtheGINGER it's pretty much the defender targeting a defenseless receiver for a big hit.
AKAtheGINGER hitting a defenseless player to the head or neck area
6:40ish the official is looking to verify that it was an interception and, in my opinion, wasn't even looking at the hit. 2 bad calls.
Australian football has a rule where if a defender hits an attacker high but only because the attacker ducked immediately before the hit, it's not illegal. I don't know why an even more physical sport like American football doesn't.
The funniest part of all of this is at the 5:40 mark when BYU's #13 does a jumping chest bump with Coach Kalani on the sideline and the coach goes sprawling backwards! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!
That first hit was clean. I agree with the announcers and Mike Perrera. There was no intent in that. Didn't lead with his head. He went low. The receiver did crouch down to brace for the hit. That's incidental. The second one I think was incidental too but the defender didn't do as much to avoid head to head contact. He did lead more with his shoulder than his head but he didn't lead as low. In both cases I think you've gotta just let them play football. (says the couch referee).
lmao what a plot twist, it was all emotional as the head coach got fired up and he was leaving then the next play all of a sudden the dude gets a one handed snag and everyone gets hyped up then its back to everyone being silent and waiting for the call
If anything the refs where targeting the BYU team
I’m a utah Ute fan and I was even saying that the first one was not targeting
I get so confused with the whole targeting penalties. Ever since the Fosters Farm Bowl last year when Nebraska lost a player because of it I have hated this call Because the official has to assume the player meant to lead with the helmet when it could have been by accident...
Targeting. The dumbest thing in football. Its a full contact sport. Get used to being hit. The ref's call in this was complete crap.
totally agree! let's go back to leather helmets too. I'd also like to add kicks to the groin and eye gouging to the list of legal hits.
lawsuits change things from a mcdonalds coffe cup to football helmets and playing
I'm with Parker. The players should bring weapons on the field to make it more entertaining, too! Imagine someone getting smacked with a morning star and dying on the field! It's a full contact sport, man!
Sure. Let's take everything to extremes rather than try to understand what I'm saying. Oh well. guess that youtube comment sectio
Nymph tokahasha CTE isn't a joke.
contact sport. I understand concussions happen but damn. when your going full speed anything is bound to happen. sheesh. I know that for fact... part of the game hahahah!!
The second "targeting" call was closer than the first one, plus the receiver did not see the player come in. Its really border line. I referee in the High School level in Arizona, High School rules are even stricter. The reasoning is the helmet to helmet contact. The first one was definitely wrong. The defender dropped low and was in the process of the original "clean" tackle attempt. It should have been reversed. The second one was far closer than the first to actual "targeting!"
Nacua didn't come close to targeting! DID EVERYTHING PERFECTLY! The ball carrier changing the HIT ZONE late cannot make the defender get punished!
1st one is not correct call. I think 2nd one is though
I'm late to the party but, it pays to bring your conference refs...
NCAA is trying to send a message that you ought to be form tackling correctly. Not trying to blow up the receiver. Hence these types of calls and subsequent ejections. Either adapt and form tackle, or get flagged and ejected. Not hard to figure out.
Truth
I agree that the officials made the right calls, but I don't like the nature of the rule. Those types of hits were legal for more than 100 years and the only reason why these kinds of rule changes even exist is because of recent research on brain diseases that are correlated with general football contact (not just big hits). The NFL started this nonsense and it looks like the college game is replicating it. Football is dangerous. That was never a secret. And it will continue to be dangerous even with rules discouraging big hits.
In the first tackle, he absolutey DID adapt his hitting.
Went shoulder first into the chest/shoulder of the receiver, got his head out of the way and made a clean hit.
He just can't go any lower than that, he is still a human being who can't bend himself limitless...
He could have effectivly ended the WRs day and probably his season if he wanted to, but he made a strong effort not to do that and still got flagged and ejected...
That just sends a terrible message to the players
@Michel Smiffi: He was trying to deliver a shoulder hit but the problem is that the rule doesn't take into consideration the intentions of the player. The hit has to be timed right and because it wasn't it ended up being a helmet hit.. I despise the rule myself but that's what my understanding of it is.
Maybe but the way the rule is written and enforced is making it almost impossible for defensive players to tackle. The first defensive player did nothing wrong. The receiver is the one who put his head down and lead with the head.
I am very impressed by the BYU players, how well they handled that...I would have gone crazy if that was on me (or one of my teammates).
The NCAA needs to seriously put time into either teach their refs how to judge better what is happening in front of them, or they need to make a drastic change in the rule book.
If these kind of routine plays are enough to flag and eject a player despite their strong effort NOT to foul their opponent, their will be less and less people watching such a horribly officiated game.
Michel Smiffi yes you're right, the ejected player was so calm and didn't complain at all
Just look at 3:45 when the ref upholds the targeting call and the ejection.
He doesn't even glare at the ref.
Most people (my included) would have gone nuts at that point, especially after already seeing the replay on the jumbotron
It's an absolute horror that everyone's entertainment has been effected in an effort to prevent otherwise healthy people from dying in their 40's due to head injuries. and it's the defender's responsibility period. They made this change in NCAA lacrosse, basically if you injure someone on a hit or roll someone over unnecessarily, even if it's within the rules, it's a penalty. Even if you factor in what these players receive in scholarships they make less than minimum wage and don't deserve a life of severe concussion symptoms just because you want to see someone get destroyed.
Refs was clearly drunk or paid by Utah😂
For the first plat. Kick out the receiver. He lowered his head.
I'm surprised they didn't call that running into the QB after he got rid of the ball
First one the defender was fucked once that wide receiver crunched
Only zoobs would think that there was a problem with the targeting calls.
That was a heck of an interception by Bernard. Great concentration and even better catch. Makes me really happy that he's now playing for the good guys in this rivalry.
Francis Bernard is a prick you "zoob"
Um no it was not
the first one is questionable. the second was a block.
I'm a Utes fan and the first one was not targeting the receiver was bracing for the hit. Though it should have been a fumble. Although the second one was not targeting, more like unnecessary roughness.
BYU coach could have beaten Utah by himself how mad he got!!
Idk why anyone would want to play defense these days
I like how the announcer blames the QB on the first one... Yeah, how?
I am all for protecting players, but neither of these should be targeting. If it is, then they need to revise the rule better. There was no malicious intent in either one, and the first one was almost comical that a flag was even thrown. They need to protect the players, but on neither of these plays were the receivers actually targeted.
Ref: Targeting! Number 32.
Announcer: Not quite, it's 12.
Ref: Correction, it was 13.
Announcer: Again, No.
Lol. 😆
These officials clearly had it out for BYU from the beginning
First one was 100% not targeting, number 2 was a good call
Niko Yochum, watch the 2nd one again and watch the safeties head. I think he was watching the interception and didn't even see the reciever.
Yeah, these players aren't beating each other to a pulp enough. The sportscasters really want to see players really beaten up. The targeting penalties should be called more often to teach the players and coaches to back off on the violence but the sportscasters won't like that!
Hitter made no attempt to wrap. He was going for the light-em-up hit.
The first one is completely ridiculous. If that is an ejection from the game one could easily get half of the other team ejected from the game just by leaning down when getting tackled. This is the kind of calls that started diving in soccer and if they won't stop officiating like that we will be having dives and drawing ejections in football as well. I really don'T think that anybody would like to see that. Also the second one is way too harsh of a call especially as they've already ejected another player for basically nothing before.