Started By
Message
Anyone know why the two target calls on Monday night..?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:34 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:34 pm
Were NOT called?
And were the two pick plays a make up call for those two horrible non-calls by the referees?
And were the two pick plays a make up call for those two horrible non-calls by the referees?
7
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:35 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
two target calls
Because they weren't targeting?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:36 pm to chattabama
A white strip on top of Foster's helmet came sticking straight up after the hurricane play.
How could this be if impact was not made from the crown of the helmet?
How could this be if impact was not made from the crown of the helmet?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:37 pm to Errerrerrwere
Are you really this desperate for a troll attempt and attention?
This is sad, even for a poster of your low standards.
This is sad, even for a poster of your low standards.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:37 pm to Errerrerrwere
Yes
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:38 pm to spacewrangler
I'm simply asking a question about the game. Move along if you don't like it.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:39 pm to Errerrerrwere
Neither was targeting. Brown hit Williams with the side of his helmet after he caught the ball, so Williams wasn't defenseless. If a player is not defenseless, it's only targeting if you lead with the crown of the helmet.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:39 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Were NOT called?
Rumor is that the refs felt bad for Alabama.
They knew they didn't stand a chance, so ejecting their players would just be cruel.
quote:
two pick plays a make up call for those two horrible non-calls by the referees?
Looked clean to me.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:41 pm to Errerrerrwere
IMHO
the two targets were judgement calls. Did't use the crown of the helmet so would be relying on the defenseless player part of the rule. Tough call in that big of a situation.
The pic plays were legal. The second one the bama player tackled the guy into his defense (or you could argue they just got tangled up). Crossing routes are designed to create congestion. Could have been PI without the catch.
the two targets were judgement calls. Did't use the crown of the helmet so would be relying on the defenseless player part of the rule. Tough call in that big of a situation.
The pic plays were legal. The second one the bama player tackled the guy into his defense (or you could argue they just got tangled up). Crossing routes are designed to create congestion. Could have been PI without the catch.
This post was edited on 1/12/17 at 4:50 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:45 pm to MIZ_COU
Well, I've been watching Foster's hit recently and I have to say that looked like targeting to me. Clear as day.
That kid is a dirty player and deserved to be thrown out of that game.
That kid is a dirty player and deserved to be thrown out of that game.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 4:50 pm to Errerrerrwere
It was a dirty hit. He got a PF. I think in a reg season game he get's the targeting, was a tough call in that situation
Posted on 1/12/17 at 5:00 pm to Errerrerrwere
Because they weren't targeting.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News