- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Anyone have a GIF of Tory Carter hit
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:32 am to lsupride87
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:32 am to lsupride87
It isn't dirty because it wasn't blindsided
but its textbook targeting
but its textbook targeting
1
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:35 am to Salmon
I agree with you 100%! It was not dirty but it was targeting
This post was edited on 12/9/19 at 8:36 am
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:37 am to LSUNV
It's dirty because players were slowing down cause it was a touchback, like 85% of Avery Atkins 114 kickoffs in 2019.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:39 am to ArkTiger55
I was outside finishing up grilling and had music on and heard that hit. Came in to watch the replay, and I'm pretty sure I saw the moment that kids soul left his body
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:49 am to LSUdude247
quote:
It was a fricking dirty hit
STFU snowflake. Wasn't dirty at all.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 8:56 am to RedTigerRulz
Some of you soft arse pussies need to wipe, reload with a new rag, and get on with your needlepoint.
These boys aren't playing tiddly-winks.
These boys aren't playing tiddly-winks.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 9:20 am to TH03
quote:Meh. Targeting absolutely, looks very dirty, no
It's textbook targeting. Looks very bad.
He is blocking a guy who is staring right at him, and the guy ducks for impact.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 9:21 am to Lester Earl
quote:Not really. look at #34 and the uga player
It's dirty because players were slowing down cause it was a touchback
They are still going at each other, and 44 for UGA is chop stepping looking like he is ready to make a break
This post was edited on 12/9/19 at 9:22 am
Posted on 12/9/19 at 9:22 am to TH03
After reviewing your post history, I rather enjoy your takes on most threads. But, in this instance, you're off the mark.
Carter's left foot is on the ground at the point of body contact.
Nearly physical impossible to run full speed then crouch & thrust at the angle Carter was running.
Carter hit the player in the chest.
Had the GA player not slowed up (proof it wasn't blindside), Carter's helmet would've landed to the outside half of the GA player's body, as obviously intended. There would be NO FLAG whatsoever & everyone is talking about a big hit instead of "targeting".
The "crown" of the helmet is higher than the "forehead" area of the helmet & this interpretation has been brutally misinterpreted for far too many "Targeting" penalties. Carter clearly hits him with the top of his facemask + forehead area of his helmet which is TEXTBOOK "leading with his nose" as taught by every football coach worth a damn in the world.
Targeting should always have an INTENT component for consideration. When a player commits to a hit but then the opposite player completely changes their body position in that split moment, accidents are going to happen = that's football. I have a big problem with "targeting/"hits to the head" when a defender OBVIOUSLY lined up for a clean tackle but the ball carrier or another player effectively changes the body position in the split moment thus opening up the perception of a hit to the head, when there was zero intent or way of avoiding the hit to the head (lest the player simply not contribute to the tackle & risk the ball carrier gaining more yards or scoring-THEN where would we be...?)
Additional consideration for the intent, especially in hits like this, is that Carter's KOR assignment is the player he hit. The replay video CLEARLY shows Carter had no idea how deep the ball was kicked & there is no whistle to call off Carter from his assignment/live play.
It was a live play by a 21/22 year old college Junior from the State of Georgia playing in front of thousands of family, friends, former teammates, former HS opponents, etc. The kid isn't a villain. He will serve his BS suspension & be back to making contributions to our National Championship program.
quote:
Launch--a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.
Carter's left foot is on the ground at the point of body contact.
quote:
A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.
Nearly physical impossible to run full speed then crouch & thrust at the angle Carter was running.
quote:
Leading with helmet, shoulder forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.
Carter hit the player in the chest.
quote:
Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of his helmet.
Had the GA player not slowed up (proof it wasn't blindside), Carter's helmet would've landed to the outside half of the GA player's body, as obviously intended. There would be NO FLAG whatsoever & everyone is talking about a big hit instead of "targeting".
The "crown" of the helmet is higher than the "forehead" area of the helmet & this interpretation has been brutally misinterpreted for far too many "Targeting" penalties. Carter clearly hits him with the top of his facemask + forehead area of his helmet which is TEXTBOOK "leading with his nose" as taught by every football coach worth a damn in the world.
Targeting should always have an INTENT component for consideration. When a player commits to a hit but then the opposite player completely changes their body position in that split moment, accidents are going to happen = that's football. I have a big problem with "targeting/"hits to the head" when a defender OBVIOUSLY lined up for a clean tackle but the ball carrier or another player effectively changes the body position in the split moment thus opening up the perception of a hit to the head, when there was zero intent or way of avoiding the hit to the head (lest the player simply not contribute to the tackle & risk the ball carrier gaining more yards or scoring-THEN where would we be...?)
Additional consideration for the intent, especially in hits like this, is that Carter's KOR assignment is the player he hit. The replay video CLEARLY shows Carter had no idea how deep the ball was kicked & there is no whistle to call off Carter from his assignment/live play.
It was a live play by a 21/22 year old college Junior from the State of Georgia playing in front of thousands of family, friends, former teammates, former HS opponents, etc. The kid isn't a villain. He will serve his BS suspension & be back to making contributions to our National Championship program.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 9:25 am to ArkTiger55
In my opinion, Total Bush league play. The ball was going out of the end zone and LSU did not have a return set up. I am glad he got tossed out of the game.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 9:44 am to JKChesterton
Some of you boys need to go play Soccer and leave football alone or better yet start you up a flag football league where all you pussies and snowflakes can go play.
That was no way a dirty hit. In addition, targeting is bullshite too. The reason is that most of the targeting calls are when the receiving player ducks or twists his own way into being hit "illegally" by a helmet. It is far too subjective for such a severe
penalty.
That was no way a dirty hit. In addition, targeting is bullshite too. The reason is that most of the targeting calls are when the receiving player ducks or twists his own way into being hit "illegally" by a helmet. It is far too subjective for such a severe
penalty.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 10:01 am to J2thaROC
quote:
He had no way of knowing it was going to be a touchback.
I agree that it was a good hit except for leading with the crown of his helmet.
However, I completely disagree that TC had "no way of knowing it was going to be a touchback."
I do not think CEH has attempted to return more than 5 kicks all season. I'd be surprised if it was that many.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 10:17 am to rob62
quote:
Some of you boys need to go play Soccer and leave football alone or better yet start you up a flag football league where all you pussies and snowflakes can go play.
That was no way a dirty hit. In addition, targeting is bull shite too. The reason is that most of the targeting calls are when the receiving player ducks or twists his own way into being hit "illegally" by a helmet. It is far too subjective for such a severe
penalty.
I played HS football and I think it was a bush league play. And targeting is not a BS rule. How many studies have to be done to show leading with the helmet causes severe head injuries. Hell I played 4A HS ball in LA back in the early 80's and I had damn concussion.
Nobody else on LSU's team did what Carter did. So what does that tell you?
Posted on 12/9/19 at 10:21 am to rob62
quote:would you say the same if Carter played for Georgia and did that to one of our guys?
That was no way a dirty hit.
Be honest, please.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 10:23 am to rob62
quote:no, it's not.
In addition, targeting is bullshite too.
You can deny it all you want, but brain injury is a real issue and leagues know they have to deal with it. That's why we see the targeting rule.
Either the game will be made safer by eliminating these types of hits, or the game will get litigated out of existence. Your choice.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 10:57 am to atltiger6487
quote:
Either the game will be made safer by eliminating these types of hits, or the game will get litigated out of existence. Your choice.
It is already being litigated out of existence or changed beyond recognition. Eliminating legitimate tackles, blocks, or even kick offs will only be the beginning because people like you and other snowflakes will always find "the next thing" to claim is too hazardous. If the game is too rough for you then don't play it.
What next? Why not eliminate boxing? Why not eliminate MMA? Why not eliminate pitching in Baseball because there are too many arm injuries? Where do all you "do-gooders" stop before the game is destroyed?
Oh, and everybody doesn't deserve a trophy for participation and keeping score matters.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 11:00 am to atltiger6487
quote:
no, it's not.
You can deny it all you want, but brain injury is a real issue and leagues know they have to deal with it. That's why we see the targeting rule.
Either the game will be made safer by eliminating these types of hits, or the game will get litigated out of existence. Your choice.
You get this. In many states across the country, even states with great HS football tradition, HS football participation rates are down. What happens if Insurance companies will no longer cover HS football. Sports is one of the things that has helped bridge social economic and ethnic gaps and brought communities together. Sports can do that, but the risk to serious injury in football can no longer be ignored. The Science and Economics are not on the side of those who refuse accept or adapt to the new rules in place in the game to enhance player safety.
LINK
Posted on 12/9/19 at 11:03 am to rob62
quote:
What next? Why not eliminate boxing? Why not eliminate MMA?
Those are combat sports. Not applicable to football.
You don't sound like the type of person that would care about what I say next but I'll say it anyway. The rules are changing for lots of reasons but ultimately they are changing as a response to new information.
It would be stupid to pretend not to know what we know about head injuries. You may want football to be stupid, but there is zero chance of that happening. Accepting reality is part of growing up, so quit your bitching.
This post was edited on 12/9/19 at 11:13 am
Posted on 12/9/19 at 11:08 am to rob62
quote:
In addition, targeting is bull shite too.
Even if you were right (you’re not), it is irrelevant. Targeting is illegal under the current rules, and the penalty is ejection. Carter’s recklessness will essentially cause him to miss four quarters where his team was counting on him to contribute.
Posted on 12/9/19 at 11:11 am to HonoraryCoonass
I was at the A&M game and didnt see it and also they didnt show it on TV that I've seen, but didnt an A&M player do the same thing to a LSU player on the opening kickoff? Always wondered why it wasnt reviewed.
This post was edited on 12/9/19 at 11:16 am
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News