Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

Kash Daniel Ejected for Targeting

Kash Daniel left Kroger Field before the final horn.

Darius West picked off a Jake Bentley pass late in the third quarter.  On the ensuing return, Kash peeled back and put a Gamecock on the turf.  Flags flew.  Upon further review, officials determined Daniel launched into the opponent.

The targeting penalty ended Daniel’s game.  He still left with a bang.

Unfortunately, the penalty will continue to pay dividends for another week.  Since the targeting occurred in the second half, Daniel will be suspended for the first half of the Texas A&M game.  Two freshmen, Chris Oats and Jamin Davis, must fill Kash’s large shoes.


Article written by Nick Roush

"Look upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole." @RoushKSR

23 Comments for Kash Daniel Ejected for Targeting

  1. Parker_UKFanNC
    10:27 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    Made contact below the head and neck area not targeting. Made contact with his shoulder first and the helmet contact occurred second should not be targeting just a unnecessary roughness penalty.

    • jahanc2uky
      5:56 pm September 30, 2018 Permalink

      Defensely player after the play was past them. Im all for UK, but this ejection and targeting call is exactly what I would want if the jerseys were reversed.

  2. Wade
    10:33 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    My man! Clean old school hit but .. trying to get rid of those but I think it’s overboard. He wasn’t looking just focused on getting in front and blocking him .the guy wasn’t defenseless and he didn’t target. Receiver could have cut back in and that guy would have had a shot to make a play. Play on ,I get calling it but after review. Cmon! Go cats

  3. UK Big Board Update
    11:08 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    Remember when some of our fans wanted to fire Stoops like 2 years in? LMAO

  4. Robinson73
    11:09 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    No targeting cause Kash Daniels said so!!

  5. So basically they’re saying if the guy can’t see you then you can’t block him and you have to let him make the tackle. *facepalm*

  6. original slappy
    11:28 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    Is that something that can be appealed to the conference officiating office?

    • Miller45
      11:49 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink


    • shepdog3720
      11:05 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

      It can be appealed and should be, but I doubt the league will overturn. It’s a shame.

  7. michaelb
    11:44 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    Does he have to sit out first half next game ?

  8. Miller45
    11:48 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    +A player who is obviously out of the play
    +A player who receives a blindside block
    +A player who is deemed unable to protect themself

    Meh, whatever

  9. dhard
    11:56 pm September 29, 2018 Permalink

    I had never seen this referee crew before and hopefully, never again.

  10. ibescootch
    12:01 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

    To play Devil’s Advocate here- the play wasn’t targeting specifically because of the hit itself, but because it was considered unnecessary. The play was essentially dead already as the runner had gone out of bounds several yards before. The SC player had actually slowed down and relaxed a bit, since the play was over, so it just looked bad for the timing of it. I agree though, the hit itself was clean, and I definitely don’t think malicious. I’m assuming they’re trying to err on the side of protecting people from unnecessarily getting hurt, which could have happened on that play. I’d say in the normal run of play, that’s a clean hit all day.

    • Miller45
      12:17 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

      If the tables were turned and it were one of our players on the receiving end we *may* just maybe have a different perception regarding the ruling

  11. runningunnin.454
    12:03 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

    These officials sucked.

  12. Larkin123
    12:13 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

    I was a bit surprised that hitting an arm then shoulder then head was targeting. They were both standing upright, and its hard to prove how the first contact affected the the second and third contact….

  13. ClutchCargo
    1:13 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

    Last week’s officiating crew did a great job of managing the chippiness and kept it from getting out of hand without throwing a flag every play. This one, not so much.

  14. BCO
    1:43 am September 30, 2018 Permalink

    Trash call. To uphold it after reviewing is unbelievable.