Friday’s Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate rivalry between No. 6 Georgia and Georgia Tech has some clean, old-fashioned controversy.
The issues arose late in the fourth quarter with the Yellow Jackets (7-4, 5-3 in ACC play) sporting a 27-20 lead with 2:05 remaining in the third quarter. Facing third-and-1, Georgia Tech could have iced the game with another first down against the Bulldogs (9-2, 6-2 SEC) in an upste that would have massive ramifications on the College Football Playoff race.
REQUIRED READING: Renewal of Texas-Texas A&M rivalry highlights college football Week 14 games to watch
Except, quarterback Haynes King fumbled the ball on the QB sneak following a hard hit by Georgia defensive back Dan Jackson. It was immediately recovered by Bulldogs defender Chaz Chambliss, leading to a game-tying Bulldogs score with 1:01 remaining. The game eventually went to overtime.
But Yellow Jackets fans and neutral observers alike wondered whether officials on the field missed targeting by Jackson. Indeed, a replay posted by Georgia football’s official account showed what appeared to be textbook targeting by Jackson, as he lowered his head and appeared to hit King’s facemask with the crown of his helmet:
However, following a review of the play — in which officials confirmed Georgia recovered the King fumble — no mention was made of potential targeting, either by officials or by announcers on the “SEC on ABC” broadcast.
Considering the stakes of the game and the potential for a rare upset by a top-10 Georgia team, however, the college football world was incensed at what it thought was a missed call in a pivotal moment.
Here’s more:
REQUIRED READING: It’s Rivalry Week: Embrace the crazy with College Football Playoff spots on line this Thanksgiving
What is targeting in college football?
The NCAA defines targeting as meeting one of the following criteria:
Should a player be penalized for targeting, it would incur a 15-yard penalty and ejection of the offending player.
College football world reacts to targeting no-call
SEC refs confirm no targeting because it doesn’t fit their narrative.
— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) November 30, 2024
I know the runner was not defenseless, but the tackler lead with the crown of the helmet and made contact with the helmet of the Georgia Tech player’s facemask.
In the replay, you see the helmet as the first thing to move. But how is it not targeting or even looked at? pic.twitter.com/qsoIscWeGH
— Kyle Davis (@TheDaringPastry) November 30, 2024
One was ruled targeting, one wasn’t.
One is clearly targeting, one is not.
Both were wrong.
I’m not asking for refs to be perfect, I’m just asking for some consistency in one of the most controversial penalties in football. pic.twitter.com/HksgzuEyD1
— Adam King (@AdamKing10TV) November 30, 2024
I have no idea if there was targeting or not on the Haynes King fumble, but I’m surprised it never even came up on the broadcast.
— Stewart Mandel (@slmandel) November 30, 2024
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Did officials miss Georgia targeting on Haynes King forced fumble?