Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/5/15 at 9:29 pm to ryanthe4aces
All I know is mike Evans did that shite on the reg and never seemed to get busted for it.
I just hate the ejection part of the rule. No player should get ejected from a game unless he nails the refs wife during halftime.
I just hate the ejection part of the rule. No player should get ejected from a game unless he nails the refs wife during halftime.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 9:52 pm to ryanthe4aces
I like the aggressiveness.
First time I have seen a receiver called for targeting.
RSJ is a big boy. He will just need to squat more next time he blows somebody up.
No whining.
First time I have seen a receiver called for targeting.
RSJ is a big boy. He will just need to squat more next time he blows somebody up.
No whining.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 9:53 pm to tLSUtiger93
quote:He blocked a guy who was attempting to make a tackle. The guy was not remotely "defenseless."
he hit a defenseless player forcibly in the head/neck area /thread
Posted on 10/5/15 at 9:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
The guy was not remotely "defenseless."
Anyone receiving a blindside block is by definition, defenseless
Posted on 10/5/15 at 9:58 pm to Agforlife
quote:
I feel sorry for all the knees that are going to get blown out.
If a receiver blocks below the waist on a play like that, it's a foul.
Read the fricking rule book
Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:09 pm to FishFearMe
Hell since they called this on RSJ, I wonder what they would've done to Swope in the 2012 game against Ms. St. 
Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:12 pm to ISEN_AG
Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:13 pm to arrakis
quote:
If a receiver blocks below the waist on a play like that, it's a foul.
Read the fricking rule book
No shite sherlock, I was referring to the targeting rule in general as it's usually called on DBS going high and just wondering how many receivers knees die in the future. That is the first targeting call I have seen called on a block (not saying it hasn't been I just haven't seen it) most are called on the defense for blowing up a receiver.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:14 pm to ryanthe4aces
It wasn't the worst targeting call ever, but he essentially got penalized for being six inches taller than the guy he hit.
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.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 10:47 pm to tLSUtiger93
quote:
Anyone receiving a blindside block is by definition, defenseless
That kind of block happens on punt and kick returns all the time w/no call.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 11:03 pm to ryanthe4aces
A linebacker trying to smash a ball carrier is NOT a defenseless player
You are not allowed to block below the waist when blocking downfield
The contact was shoulder to shoulder
It was a misinterpretation of the rule book, multiple misinterpretations
Bad call
You are not allowed to block below the waist when blocking downfield
The contact was shoulder to shoulder
It was a misinterpretation of the rule book, multiple misinterpretations
Bad call
Posted on 10/5/15 at 11:13 pm to Spirit Of Aggieland
Anyone receiving a blindside block is by definition, defenseless
this is not an opinion, this is explicitly stated in the NCAA rulebook
this is not an opinion, this is explicitly stated in the NCAA rulebook
Posted on 10/5/15 at 11:30 pm to tLSUtiger93
I guess they amended the wording of the rule book in 2013 after the Kenny Bell block
But I wonder why Michigan St didn't get penalized for it LAST year against Baylor in the Cotton Bowl
As someone noted earlier, this happens ALL the time on special teams plays. Selective enforcement is what makes this ruling a complete joke
But I wonder why Michigan St didn't get penalized for it LAST year against Baylor in the Cotton Bowl
As someone noted earlier, this happens ALL the time on special teams plays. Selective enforcement is what makes this ruling a complete joke
Posted on 10/5/15 at 11:36 pm to ryanthe4aces
no way no how was that a good call. shoulder to shoulder. the goal of the rule should be to reduce head/neck injuries. the most that could happen in a hit like that is someone get the breath knocked out of them.
Posted on 10/5/15 at 11:56 pm to miledawg
While that was not the shittiest targeting call I've seen it was still a crap call. I can't believe it didn't get overturned.
Posted on 10/6/15 at 12:01 am to ryanthe4aces
Correct call, as guess but the rule is complete shite. It needs to be anended. Helmets are going to touch at some points. It's impossible to stop it. Kicking guys out of the game every time there is slight contact is bullshite.
Posted on 10/6/15 at 12:10 am to JesusQuintana
The rule, as written, does not include incidental contact.
It requires the head or neck to be targeted by the hitter. See the previous page for the text.
It was not the correct call.
It requires the head or neck to be targeted by the hitter. See the previous page for the text.
It was not the correct call.
Posted on 10/6/15 at 12:16 am to ccard257
You could hear that pop way up in the stands when Swope destroyed that guy.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News