Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
targeting call
ApostleofGrief
Member Posts: 3,904
From the stands yesterday's targeting call looked like a terrible call. I never saw a replay. The people that operate the jumbotron make sure to never replay whatever it is you want to see. I have a feeling that is part of the job description. WTF happened? It looked like an inadvertant target.
Comments
-
He lead with his head.
-
I didn't see that he really hit the runner dangerously. There should be like a watered down "inadvertant target" call for like 10 yards which doesn't throw the guy out.AEB said:He lead with his head.
-
I've been saying that for a while. They need an in between penalty. On that play. The offensive player lowered his head too. Otherwise he would have hit him in the chest.ApostleofGrief said:
I didn't see that he really hit the runner dangerously. There should be like a watered down "inadvertant target" call for like 10 yards which doesn't throw the guy out.AEB said:He lead with his head.
-
Not only should players be allowed to lead with their helmet, they should be encouraged to do so. Make the offensive players learn how to take care of themselves if they don't want to die from too many concussions by age 45.
-
It's a really good idea. The head usually does rise out from the shoulders and often is in front of the rest of the body. The NCAA is trying to overlegislate anatomy to some degree. Yeah, throw the real offenders out but go a little easier on the inadvertent cases!2001400ex said:
I've been saying that for a while. They need an in between penalty. On that play. The offensive player lowered his head too. Otherwise he would have hit him in the chest.ApostleofGrief said:
I didn't see that he really hit the runner dangerously. There should be like a watered down "inadvertant target" call for like 10 yards which doesn't throw the guy out.AEB said:He lead with his head.
-
We've all been saying it for awhile.2001400ex said:
I've been saying that for a while. They need an in between penalty. On that play. The offensive player lowered his head too. Otherwise he would have hit him in the chest.ApostleofGrief said:
I didn't see that he really hit the runner dangerously. There should be like a watered down "inadvertant target" call for like 10 yards which doesn't throw the guy out.AEB said:He lead with his head.
It's not rocket surgery. -
Ruining the game. Even though the Hanson targeting in the Oregon game was technically targeting it was a lineman on a linebacker in the box. Lineman are typically taller than the people they hit and when they dip their shoulders the head is fogging to make contact. The game is too "bang bang" in the box and judgement needs to be exercised there. The concept of defenseless is different for a guy laying out across the middle i the d backfield. That guy can get fucked up. A linebacker in the box pursing the play is a different level of vulnerability.
The pussification of the game is almost complete. -
It was targeting. JoJo knows better.
-
True. It was a pretty hot topic in chat last night. Another huge benefit of being a VIP.HillsboroDuck said:
We've all been saying it for awhile.2001400ex said:
I've been saying that for a while. They need an in between penalty. On that play. The offensive player lowered his head too. Otherwise he would have hit him in the chest.ApostleofGrief said:
I didn't see that he really hit the runner dangerously. There should be like a watered down "inadvertant target" call for like 10 yards which doesn't throw the guy out.AEB said:He lead with his head.
It's not rocket surgery. -
Wasn't JoJo's head aimed at the ball? Seems like it was only a case of targeting because the Stanford player lowered his helmet at that last split second... had he not done that, I don't think targeting would have been called.
