Started By
Message
re: That Ray hit was Quinton Dial-esque,
Posted on 12/8/14 at 8:45 pm to bmy
Posted on 12/8/14 at 8:45 pm to bmy
quote:
I'd argue that under the rules back then he could have still easily been ejected for it.
I wouldn't. Today's rules sure. Although he was blocking. It still would get him ejected for targeting more than likely.
Back then, there definitely wouldn't have been an ejection. Probably why there wasn't an ejection.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 8:47 pm to Kcoyote
quote:blocking is one of the most common targeting calls.
Although he was blocking.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 9:59 pm to Kcoyote
quote:
I wouldn't. Today's rules sure. Although he was blocking. It still would get him ejected for targeting more than likely.
Back then, there definitely wouldn't have been an ejection. Probably why there wasn't an ejection.
These is from the 2011-2012 Rulebook.. Rule 9-1-3 and 9-1-4 applied back when Dial crushed Murrays face.
RULING:
Foul by B79 for targeting his opponent and initiating contact with the top of his helmet. Ejection for a flagrant foul.
Defenseless Player: Contact to Head or Neck Area
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area
of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder. When
in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6).
He could have been ejected for using the crown of his helmet or for targeting the head/neck area of a player who was "out of the play".
This post was edited on 12/8/14 at 10:01 pm
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News