Started By
Message
How was this not targeting?
Posted on 1/3/15 at 6:07 am
Posted on 1/3/15 at 6:07 am
I don't understand how this is not targeting. Everyone is talking about the hit, but I've heard no one bring up this blatant targeting. As much as I hate the rule, I thought this was the kind of hit they are trying to eliminate. If they call this, Michigan State starts pretty far back and probably doesn't win the game. I've seen hits in the grey area being called and discussed as targeting, but why not this one? It's a defenseless player and the Michigan State player launches himself into the head of Baylor's kicker.
Posted on 1/3/15 at 6:17 am to Shockley03
This hit is as legal as it gets. The kicker was going to try to make a play ( I'm assuming he would tell him a joke or bite him or something, tackling was never an option). But the hit was with the shoulder and he got in front.
Posted on 1/3/15 at 6:20 am to Shockley03
He may have been a defenseless player, that's up for interpretation.
I do not think he led with the crown of his helmet or targeted the head or neck area. It looked like shoulder to shoulder contact.
I do not think he led with the crown of his helmet or targeted the head or neck area. It looked like shoulder to shoulder contact.
Posted on 1/3/15 at 7:55 am to Shockley03
The better question is how was this not pass interference.
Posted on 1/3/15 at 11:45 am to Shockley03
Bell got flagged for this one...
Is that not the same thing?
Is that not the same thing?
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News