Started By
Message
re: Ryan Day still whining over "non-targeting" aka “Displaced Buckeye Sore Butthole thread”
Posted on 2/1/23 at 12:24 pm to Lsupimp
Posted on 2/1/23 at 12:24 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Just remember Dawg Overlords, the Football Gods giveth and also taketh away. As thou fricks, so can ye be fricketh.
Yeah, we learned that in the 41 years between 1980 and 2021
2
Posted on 2/1/23 at 12:34 pm to VoxDawg
I love that this is going to gnaw on them for generations though they’ve seemingly forgotten about what they did to McGahee in 2001 as well as the PI penalty.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 12:47 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Show us the frame where Bullard's helmet touched him.
I assume this comment is directed to Ryan Day
Posted on 2/1/23 at 12:48 pm to Long Dawg
Even if they had called targeting, it would not have made a difference. Only about a 2% chance THE arrogant Ohio State University could have won. Pick your battles Ryan Day (and lay off the black hair dye)
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:02 pm to nclsutiger
And he stepped out of the end zone and came back in, so if he had caught it, it would have been a penalty and possibly moved the FG attempt to a 50+ yarder.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:33 pm to Long Dawg
quote:
I assume this comment is directed to Ryan Day
Indeed.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:34 pm to Dawg4Life47
quote:
and possibly moved the FG attempt to a 50+ yarder.
Even comfier.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:56 pm to WaterLink
I will say it for the thousandth time, it was not targeting but it was hitting a defenseless receiver which should have been a 15 yard penalty.
The stupid targeting rule prevented the officials from making the correct call.
The stupid targeting rule prevented the officials from making the correct call.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 1:59 pm to nicholastiger
For some reason I thought the defenseless receiver was null and void in the endzone.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:12 pm to Long Dawg
I saw where he was still complaining about the call reversal. He sounds as dumb as their fans. They don't know the rules either.
Perhaps he has never looked at the hit in super slow motion.
Some of their fans have claimed it should have been called unnecessary roughness. It was a clean hit in the field of play. Nothing in the rule book about hitting someone hard.
Ohio Staters complaining about officiating is as normal for those people as breathing. They have never "lost" a game, the officials have always screwed them out of a victory.
Perhaps he has never looked at the hit in super slow motion.
Some of their fans have claimed it should have been called unnecessary roughness. It was a clean hit in the field of play. Nothing in the rule book about hitting someone hard.
Ohio Staters complaining about officiating is as normal for those people as breathing. They have never "lost" a game, the officials have always screwed them out of a victory.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:13 pm to Dawg4Life47
quote:
And he stepped out of the end zone and came back in, so if he had caught it, it would have been a penalty and possibly moved the FG attempt to a 50+ yarder.
I thought I saw his step out and com back in, too.
Out of curiosity...if anybody knows....had the referees seen him step out that would have been a penalty. If they had ruled the hit to be targeting, would they have off set, and would Bullard have been out of the game, or what happens in that scenario?
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:20 pm to nicholastiger
quote:
I will say it for the thousandth time, it was not targeting but it was hitting a defenseless receiver which should have been a 15 yard penalty.
Players attempting to catch a pass are hit all the time. Are you saying the defense cannot hit a receiver trying to catch the ball?
Absolutely no doubt in my mind you are wrong, and i don't care how many times you say it, it doesn't make it correct.
Maybe I am misunderstanding you? Can you elaborate?
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:23 pm to claydawg09
quote:
For some reason I thought the defenseless receiver was null and void in the endzone.
I THINK the defenseless receiver rule is a part of the targeting rule. And the ruling was made on targeting.
Regardless, if that were a rule that stands a lone, the receiver stepping out of bounds and coming back in would cause an off setting penalty (Harrison for being ineligible receiver) and nothing would change. They would play the down over.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:40 pm to DawgsLife
Explain to me how a clean/non-targeting hit in the field of play on a WR trying to catch a ball for a TD was a “defenseless player”?
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:45 pm to Long Dawg
quote:
Explain to me how a clean/non-targeting hit in the field of play on a WR trying to catch a ball for a TD was a “defenseless player”?
I am guessing you meant this for Nicholastiger, since I clearly agree with you?
Posted on 2/1/23 at 2:54 pm to Long Dawg
Lol, winners win and whiner’s whine
Posted on 2/1/23 at 3:01 pm to Long Dawg
Nick Saban said it was targeting as well just FYI
Posted on 2/1/23 at 3:03 pm to bunkerhill
quote:
Ohio Staters complaining about officiating is as normal for those people as breathing. They have never "lost" a game, the officials have always screwed them out of a victory.
Moron find me one OSU fan who complained about refs after the Michigan game the past two years. Congrats on the ring but holy crap you are all a sensitive bunch.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 3:08 pm to halfadolla50
quote:
Nick Saban said it was targeting as well just FYI
Oh Saban said it…end of discussion and the National Championship has been reassigned to OSU by Royal fiat.
Posted on 2/1/23 at 3:23 pm to Long Dawg
If you're a NCAA football coach and you're trying to depend on targeting calls to help you win a game, you're a straight up pussy. A few years ago there was no such thing as targeting. It was just called a good hit, which was all the one he's bitching about was.
Page 2 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News