Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:05 am to Abe1961
Yes the media has shown itself to be trustworthy. 
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:05 am to Abe1961
Melt, you sweet fricking bitch, Abe.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:06 am to Abe1961
I never saw a replay from any angle that shows the helmets hitting. From my view Whites hands were extended to the chest enough to where the Helments couldn’t have came into contact.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:07 am to Roger Klarvin
What part of the targeting rule?
Didn’t launch didn’t lead with his helmet
Hit him in the chest with his hand first.
You can’t outlaw all helmet to helmet contact.
“His feet left the ground”
Yeah he was running. You’re feet leave the ground when you do that.
Didn’t launch didn’t lead with his helmet
Hit him in the chest with his hand first.
You can’t outlaw all helmet to helmet contact.
“His feet left the ground”
Yeah he was running. You’re feet leave the ground when you do that.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:08 am to Abe1961
We (A&M) haven’t received the same national attention, but it’s happened to us almost every week.
I feel your pain; it’s frustrating.
But I don’t see it changing.
I just read an espn article about targeting, and they offered the following quote:
I feel your pain; it’s frustrating.
But I don’t see it changing.
I just read an espn article about targeting, and they offered the following quote:
quote:
Removing the ejection from the type of play Berry described was discussed, and dismissed, by the rules committee last year.
"The football committee and officiating community cannot be seen backing away from this rule," Redding said. "The game is still under attack. The rule has worked very well. The optics of backing away from this rule would be really terrible, so the committee is not in a mood to do that at all."
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:08 am to Abe1961
I agree with the call, but not for the reason the LSU fans are whining about it.
White very clearly made contact to Fitz's throat and neck with his elbow and forearm (NOT his helmet), which can be seen clearly in pictures. This is why they called it targeting and it fits the definition of the rule to a tee:
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 (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)
This post was edited on 10/21/18 at 10:24 am
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:08 am to Abe1961
The rule is stupid, the interpretation of the rule by the refs is inconsistent, and the punishment is absurd. A&M has been dealing with this for a while now, and I think we lead the league in ejections, which is totally arbitrary.
Until we make the players wear leather helmets, these things are going to happen. It is what it is.
Until we make the players wear leather helmets, these things are going to happen. It is what it is.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:11 am to Abe1961
quote:
Because the replay is in Birmingham controlled by gumps.
It’s not “controlled by gumps”, but feel free to keep believing that if it mkes you feel better.
You tin foil conspiracy theorists assume too much. Bama as a team isn’t so concerned about LSU that they’re hoping someone misses playing time. Neither are the fans. The conference doesn’t care about who plays or doesn’t play. They know whoever wins the conference with one or zero loses is in the playoff.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 10:11 am to Spirit Of Aggieland
It isn’t just that we’ve had a bunch called against us, it’s that 4 have been initiated out of the booth.
That’s questionable.
I don’t have any answers, but like I said in my previous post, I don’t think it’s going to change.
That’s questionable.
I don’t have any answers, but like I said in my previous post, I don’t think it’s going to change.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 11:07 am to Abe1961
Nothing can be done.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News