Started By
Message
re: No suspension for Dial
Posted on 12/14/12 at 9:27 am to TreyAnastasio
Posted on 12/14/12 at 9:27 am to TreyAnastasio
Murray was not defenseless but it certainly was helmet to helmet and also could have been unnecessary roughness.
Warranted a penalty but not a suspension.
Warranted a penalty but not a suspension.
Posted on 12/14/12 at 9:30 am to cas4t
the only possible argument for a penalty is the helmet to helmet/targeting angle. Murray was in front of the ball carrier and running towards the play. Dial had every right to frick him up, as long as it was a legal hit. As it was, he led with his shoulder, but probably should have been flagged for a targeting foul as he did deliver a blow to the head. But anyone arguing about unnecessary roughness and bringing up defenseless players or parroting brando's idiocy about how it was behind the play and murray wasn't a defender is a fricking idiot. a really butthurt one at that.
regardless, if you thought it should have been a suspension, I wouldn't need many guesses to guess which team you pull for.
regardless, if you thought it should have been a suspension, I wouldn't need many guesses to guess which team you pull for.
This post was edited on 12/14/12 at 9:33 am
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News