Started By
Message
re: Can we all admire how terrible these calls were?
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:38 pm to pvilleguru
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:38 pm to pvilleguru
then you need glasses
1
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:38 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
You cannot lead with the head and make contact to the facemask / neck / head area with the qb. Its been like 4 years, you should have been able to grasp this at this point.
another moron who doesn't know the rule
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:39 pm to bmy
haha.
honestly man, in a site full of awesomely crazy people you may take the cake. Keep on keeping on.
honestly man, in a site full of awesomely crazy people you may take the cake. Keep on keeping on.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:39 pm to bmy
quote:
Wrong. You can't forcibly hit him in the head or neck and it requires that the player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact.
Nope.
The rule is this
quote:
No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul
Definition of defenseless players
quote:
Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):
-A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
Indicators
quote:
Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:.....
-Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
-Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:39 pm to bmy
Both of the LSU hits were targeting. That's what the yellow flags mean.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:40 pm to GenesChin
quote:
You can ask Bama about whether pick play PIs should be called.
You never seethem called, so for consistency it definitely feels like yougot screwed. According to the rule though, pick plays should be PIs
it really wasn't even a pick play. one of the two MSU DBs initiated the contact with the receiver.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:40 pm to 56lsu
quote:
then you need glasses
Then tell me who was holding.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:40 pm to bmy
quote:
Wrong. You can't forcibly hit him in the head or neck and it requires that the player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact.
If you hit a defenseless player in the head or neck, intent is assumed
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:40 pm to bmy
quote:
another moron who doesn't know the rule
A quick 30 second google search got me the rule and I even bolded the relevant parts for your dumbass
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:40 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Both of the LSU hits were targeting. That's what the yellow flags mean.
ah. got it. all flags thrown are good calls
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:41 pm to BloodRunsRed&Black
quote:
If you hit a defenseless player in the head or neck, intent is assumed
you can't make shite up and pretend it's in the rulebook. sorry.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:42 pm to BloodRunsRed&Black
quote:
If you hit a defenseless player in the head or neck, intent is assumed
Intent isn't even part of the rule despite what BMY says
They won't call targeting on players ducking/crouching etc just because it isn't the traditional "neck/helmet area" It isn't about intent at all by the rule definition
BMY is just an idiot. SHouldn't be surprising, given he is a LSU fan
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:42 pm to bmy
quote:
you can't make shite up and pretend it's in the rulebook. sorry.
So you are the only one allowed to do that then?
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:42 pm to bmy
can you explain what about those two hits makes them not targeting?
They made initial contact with their helmet to the qb's facemask in the act of throwing. Are you saying the contact wasn't "forcible"?
They made initial contact with their helmet to the qb's facemask in the act of throwing. Are you saying the contact wasn't "forcible"?
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:43 pm to pvilleguru
both but mostly the second db as the receiver was trying to run thru them
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:44 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Intent isn't even part of the rule despite what BMY says
God you're an idiot
Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact"
Clearly that wasn't the case in either of these situations. The ejection on 92 is embarrassingly bad.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:44 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
can you explain what about those two hits makes them not targeting?
The short answer is no he can't
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:44 pm to bmy
quote:
None of them were targeting. Good job.
Why are you doing this to yourself, and to your fanbase? The rules have actually been cut-and-pasted here. There's really not a lot of ambiguity, so you're not going to magically convince people to see the hits going down in any way other than what actually appears on the screen. All fans bitch about reffing. It takes a special fan to actually post GIFs that prove he's wrong.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:44 pm to bmy
Definitely targeting.
I don't like the offensive PI call. The defender was in the direct path of the route (the receiver never changed direction). If you ask me, the only reason the flag was thrown was because the defender was so small and receiver bowled him over.
I don't like the offensive PI call. The defender was in the direct path of the route (the receiver never changed direction). If you ask me, the only reason the flag was thrown was because the defender was so small and receiver bowled him over.
Posted on 9/17/17 at 1:45 pm to bmy
quote:
you can't make shite up and pretend it's in the rulebook. sorry.
It isn't in the rule book, but that is how it is applied in practice and always has been...so the poster above is right, focusing on this is ridiculous
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News