Started By
Message
re: Is this not the definition of targeting?
Posted on 11/14/22 at 3:07 pm to 3down10
Posted on 11/14/22 at 3:07 pm to 3down10
quote:
If you want to make a case, a gif should be a minimum requirement. Still images are like cherry picked stats that 100% ignore context.
here are the gifs I could find
To me, Tennessee guy is just trying to make a normal tackle and Bennett dips his head right before the contact, causing incidental helmet to helmet contact. He's not a defenseless player, and the Tennessee defender does not initiate contact with the crown of his helmet. The no-call was the correct call there.
Most of the force on that play was the Tennessee's defender's shoulder and Bennett's shoulder/back
This post was edited on 11/14/22 at 3:15 pm
2
Posted on 11/14/22 at 3:39 pm to lsufball19
That's the definition of helmet to helmet and the intent of the rule is to prevent exactly that.
Posted on 11/14/22 at 3:40 pm to lsufball19
I think that bottom gif shows it pretty clearly that it isn't targeting. 
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News