- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Farrell's ejection seemed like an incidental deal
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:29 am
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:29 am
It did appear he hit Fitz's head but it seemed like an incidental deal. Farrell appeared to be losing balance and seemed to actually try to hold back at the same time he made contact. I didn't see an intentional targeting.
Which begs the question...should there be intentional targeting and incidental targeting? Penalties differing for both.
Which begs the question...should there be intentional targeting and incidental targeting? Penalties differing for both.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 10:37 am
19
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:32 am to Bayou
quote:
It did appear he hit Fitz's head but it seemed like an incidental deal. Farrell appeared to be losing balance and seemed to actually try to hold back at the same time he made contact. I didn't see an intentional targeting.
Which begs the question...should there be intentional targeting and incidental targeting? Penalties differing for both.
I thought it was incidental as well. The problem is that football, in general, is facing the PR problem with head injuries and is trying to show their concern for the issue. I don't disagree that it was incidental but I don't think the powers that be want to appear that they are soft on this in any way.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:34 am to Bayou
To me, you either targeted or you didn't. If the head contact was incidental, then it's just a personal foul with no ejection. If a player leads with the crown of the helmet and/or targeting is apparent, then eject the player.
ETA I think that one should have been a personal foul, not targeting
ETA I think that one should have been a personal foul, not targeting
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 6:36 am
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:49 am to Hulkklogan
I agree Hulkkogan. It looked to me on replay like he stumbled into the QB.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:53 am to LSUexile
I didn't even see a penalty...
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:56 am to BatonRougeBuckeye
It looked to me he was trying to pull up and the follow through of the throw turned Fitzgerald right into him.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:59 am to Bayou
There is wording that could, and should, account for "incidental" contact and that is where it says "force-able to contact to the head or neck...". The key word being force-able.
When I first saw it I thought Fitz's natural throwing motion brought him forward with the same force as Neil hit him.
When I first saw it I thought Fitz's natural throwing motion brought him forward with the same force as Neil hit him.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:00 am to Bayou
BS. It was a good call. Players need to play by the rules. Quit worrying about individual stardom and play the game.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:04 am to km
I have no problem with the call. He hit the quarterback in the head/shoulder area and it appear he intended to hit him high as well. This fits the targeting rule. What got me was there was a similar hit on Etling after throwing the ball away near the MSU sideline which wasn't called. The refs were not consistent.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:08 am to Bayou
Targeting, by definition, is intentional.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:08 am to Bayou
quote:
Which begs the question...should there be intentional targeting and incidental targeting? Penalties differing for both.
I think like with the face mask penalty, there could be a certain degree of discretion that went into making the call. Ultimately they decided to eliminate the confusion and make everything a personal foul. I don't see things changing with such an emphasis on limiting head injuries.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:37 am to Bayou
The refs sucked balls all night.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 7:38 am to Bayou
The fix was in from the first whistle
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:07 am to burke985
Mississippi state tackled running back out of bounds 1st quarter. No call.
He almost tackled him into the bench.
He almost tackled him into the bench.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:15 am to Bayou
That was a total horse shite call. A lot of times the targeting rule punishes defenders for being unable to defy the laws of physics, instead of intentional hits to the head.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:19 am to Alatgr
Exactly. He never put the crown of his helmet forward either. He was basically standing straight up.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:23 am to Bayou
Not a good call at all. It was clear it wasn't intentional.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:27 am to Bayou
He didn't lower his head. It wasn't a forceable blow.
It's either a terrible rule or a terrible implementation of the rule.
It's either a terrible rule or a terrible implementation of the rule.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:28 am to km
quote:
BS. It was a good call.
I'll go to my grave disagreeing with this.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:29 am to Bayou
Im glad he did it.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News