12-02-2017, 04:09 PM
12-02-2017, 04:19 PM
(12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-02-2017, 04:24 PM
(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Plus the runner spun right into him. Sad.
12-02-2017, 04:26 PM
(12-02-2017 04:24 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]Please tell me there is an appeals process?(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Plus the runner spun right into him. Sad.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-02-2017, 04:43 PM
(12-02-2017 04:26 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:24 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]Please tell me there is an appeals process?(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Plus the runner spun right into him. Sad.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
If I was coach, I'd make him sit out the offensive half of the game.
12-02-2017, 05:01 PM
(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Except it wasn't the facemask. Crown of the helmet smack against the shoulder of the player. Unfortunate, but that's the rule. They are trying to keep players from dropping their head, and he clearly dropped his head.
12-02-2017, 05:05 PM
(12-02-2017 04:43 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]LOL(12-02-2017 04:26 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:24 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]Please tell me there is an appeals process?(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Plus the runner spun right into him. Sad.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
If I was coach, I'd make him sit out the offensive half of the game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-02-2017, 05:07 PM
(12-02-2017 05:01 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Except it wasn't the facemask. Crown of the helmet smack against the shoulder of the player. Unfortunate, but that's the rule. They are trying to keep players from dropping their head, and he clearly dropped his head.
It is a bad rule then. Shouldn’t punish the kid for making a football play. He wasn’t defenseless, and there was no intent to injure.
12-02-2017, 05:13 PM
(12-02-2017 05:01 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]So now you can't hit a kid's shoulder pads? The whole rule needs to be reviewed. Sort of like speeding. If posted limit is 65 and you are doing 66, you are technically speeding, but if you are keeping up with traffic, so you don't get run over your intent isn't to speed.(12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Except it wasn't the facemask. Crown of the helmet smack against the shoulder of the player. Unfortunate, but that's the rule. They are trying to keep players from dropping their head, and he clearly dropped his head.
Our kid had no intention of spearing or injuring the opposing player. It was a bang, bang play. I looked at it throughout the replay and IMO it was a terrible call and penalized a kid for being a football player.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-02-2017, 05:13 PM
(12-02-2017 05:07 PM)rockytop Wrote: [ -> ]Agree 100%(12-02-2017 05:01 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Except it wasn't the facemask. Crown of the helmet smack against the shoulder of the player. Unfortunate, but that's the rule. They are trying to keep players from dropping their head, and he clearly dropped his head.
It is a bad rule then. Shouldn’t punish the kid for making a football play. He wasn’t defenseless, and there was no intent to injure.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-02-2017, 05:13 PM
(12-02-2017 05:07 PM)rockytop Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 05:01 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:19 PM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ](12-02-2017 04:08 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: [ -> ]By the letter of the rule, it was targeting. Lowered his head and made forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. That's targeting, according to the rule.Facemask to the center of his shoulder pads is not the crown. It was a terrible call.
I don't think he meant to do it. Think he was trying to lead with the shoulder, but the player got spun into him, but regardless, he did hit him with the crown of the helmet. Certainly sucks he will miss half the bowl game.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Except it wasn't the facemask. Crown of the helmet smack against the shoulder of the player. Unfortunate, but that's the rule. They are trying to keep players from dropping their head, and he clearly dropped his head.
It is a bad rule then. Shouldn’t punish the kid for making a football play. He wasn’t defenseless, and there was no intent to injure.
The rule is about reducing the incidence of head injury whether the hit is from intent to injure or not.
12-02-2017, 08:37 PM
Great Game, Great Win MAC Champs!
12-03-2017, 06:01 AM
what a tribute to the depth of this team and the consistency of it's senior leaders, woodside, swanson, weiss, nkansah, moore, woodley and mathis as well as all the backups who had to step up and take on a bigger role. this team is resilient, got pummeled with injuries and still won a title.
12-03-2017, 08:43 AM
Couldn't follow the game live, and haven't been through the whole game thread. Chances are somebody mentioned this, but I just noticed the Rockets only committed four penalties. And apparently, based on some of the comments elsewhere on the board, the zebras were having a tough day. Haven't watched the game yet (which I recorded on my DVD) so can't comment on how the officials did. But four is much better than UT's average.
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-foo...s-per-game
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-foo...s-per-game
12-03-2017, 08:58 AM
(12-03-2017 08:43 AM)cnyrocketfan Wrote: [ -> ]Couldn't follow the game live, and haven't been through the whole game thread. Chances are somebody mentioned this, but I just noticed the Rockets only committed four penalties. And apparently, based on some of the comments elsewhere on the board, the zebras were having a tough day. Haven't watched the game yet (which I recorded on my DVD) so can't comment on how the officials did. But four is much better than UT's average.
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-foo...s-per-game
They didn't seem to be in control and confusion over calls was rampant.
12-03-2017, 09:26 AM
A little underwhelmed by the Blah's coverage in the Sunday paper.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
12-03-2017, 02:27 PM
12-03-2017, 02:29 PM
12-03-2017, 02:36 PM
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
12-03-2017, 02:37 PM
(12-03-2017 09:26 AM)emanoh Wrote: [ -> ]A little underwhelmed by the Blah's coverage in the Sunday paper.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Blah been irrelevant for years