1. that's not what i said.
2. according to the rule, he didn't have to "target" the defenseless player. had he stood still, there's no way he gets flagged and you know it.
3. standing still doesn't equate to uselessness.

quote:
he didn't lower his head and launch

actually the replay shows he did.

1. he ran towards the player
2. he lowered his helmet. the helmets made contact first.
3. he definitely launched into the defender.

quote:
he made a blindside block, albeit a vicious one, but it was just a blindside block.

according to the prior iteration of the rule, you would be correct. i don't necessarily agree with the new rule but, i do understand the reason and don't like seeing players get hurt.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by AgBQ00

Member since Aug 2014

2022 posts

Posted on 10/5/15 at 8:55 pm to bfniii

Helmets did not contact first

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by aggiegreg93

Austin, Tx

Member since Jul 2012

1013 posts

Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:38 pm to bfniii

quote:
quote: players are just supposed to stop and not play 1. that's not what i said. 2. according to the rule, he didn't have to "target" the defenseless player. had he stood still, there's no way he gets flagged and you know it. 3. standing still doesn't equate to uselessness. quote: he didn't lower his head and launch actually the replay shows he did. 1. he ran towards the player 2. he lowered his helmet. the helmets made contact first. 3. he definitely launched into the defender. quote: he made a blindside block, albeit a vicious one, but it was just a blindside block. according to the prior iteration of the rule, you would be correct. i don't necessarily agree with the new rule but, i do understand the reason and don't like seeing players get hurt.

It's perfectly obvious you've never played a fricking down of football.

0 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board