Last night, #23 Arizona State was upset by San Diego State, 28-21. With :14 remaining in the game, ASU QB Manny Wilkins rifled a 48-yard bomb to WR Frank Darby, who'd caught 5 passes for 127 yards up to that point. As Darby leaped to catch the ball at the 2-yardline against double coverage, SDSU DB Trenton Thompson launched himself into Darby while he was still in the air, colliding helmet to helmet, and the ball barely touched the ground as Darby landed on his back.

FRANK DARBY R U SERIOUS!?!?! pic.twitter.com/0Hnsvk2d3i
— Sun Devil Football (@ASUFootball) September 16, 2018

You can see more of the play here, including replays.

After review, the targeting call against Thompson was upheld and he was ejected and will sit out the first half of the Aztecs' game against Eastern Michigan but the replay booth also ruled that the pass was incomplete. ASU got the ball at the SDSU 35 for one final play and SDSU batted away Wilkins' desperation pass in the end zone.

Football's a violent sport, there are a lot of hits that impact its ebb and flow, and injuries are a part of the game. I am the last person to advocate headhunting but it's interesting that given the stakes and the play's impact on the outcome of the game, the penalty for Thompson's infraction hardly seems to fit the crime. In this case, it appears as if crime did pay, that Thompson's targeting turned out to be a smart play, that playing dirty actually yielded the most positive result for SDSU.

Watching the replay, is there a point where it's reasonable to believe Darby would've held onto the ball had he not been targeted and, by extension, the pass should have been ruled complete? Obviously, that's a big leap based on assumption and not the visible evidence that the ball did touch the ground. If nothing else, what's the deterrent for discouraging someone for doing the same thing under similar circumstances in the future?