- 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
Is the ejection really a 50/50 call?
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:28 am
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:28 am
From the announcers calling the game, Cole Cublic, and Peter Burns (I'm sure that there are more from the SEC network) you would think that this was a borderline call. I just don't understand how none of the announcers on TV even questions the penalty and how fast the review happened. Usually when targeting calls are like this you hear a lot of back and forth but you didnt get any of that. And now Peter burns is saying that it was a 50/50 call? Are we just blinded by our love for the Tigers or is this just complete nonsense?
6
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:30 am to tiger25
Google Garrett Walvoord video on Twitter or Utube. Side view, no way that was targeting, roughing the passer maybe, but not targeting. The review was a joke. Look at video of the Bama hit on Tenn QB, killed him, NO CALL.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:37 am to tiger25
Here's the thing. I do believe it was a call that was extremely questionable. The problem with questionable calls that lead to players being ejected and suspended in future competition, is that it shouldn't be questionable. Yeah, you can make an argument that it is targeting.....but you shouldn't be suspending players from future competition over calls that aren't obvious.
I saw multiple hits on Saturday that had more evidence to support the call of targeting. Personally, I don't think the Bama hit on Guarantano was targeting, neither was D. White's. That being said, there is much stronger evidence to support targeting on the Guarantano hit than White's. Replay is there to correct these things. The replay booth did the right thing in the Bama/Tennessee game by reversing the targeting call on the goal line. The replay booth went full on retard on the Devin White hit. That is who should bear the blame.....whoever confirmed targeting.
I saw multiple hits on Saturday that had more evidence to support the call of targeting. Personally, I don't think the Bama hit on Guarantano was targeting, neither was D. White's. That being said, there is much stronger evidence to support targeting on the Guarantano hit than White's. Replay is there to correct these things. The replay booth did the right thing in the Bama/Tennessee game by reversing the targeting call on the goal line. The replay booth went full on retard on the Devin White hit. That is who should bear the blame.....whoever confirmed targeting.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:40 am to smooth99
quote:
That is who should bear the blame.....whoever confirmed targeting.
McDaid confirmed targeting according to The Advocate
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:40 am to tiger25
Isn't the entire way the rule here is set up, so that we err on the side of NOT SUSPENDING a player in the case of a "borderline call"?
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:40 am to tiger25
Because all of these people are clearly advised to back the officials. They are paid by the SEC. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Of course they aren’t gonna say what they feel on the situation.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:47 am to Bengal26
quote:
Because all of these people are clearly advised to back the officials. They are paid by the SEC. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Of course they aren’t gonna say what they feel on the situation.
I mean I can somewhat understand that for cublic and burns but the announcers (besides McElroy) literally had nothing to say other then "oh man hea gonna miss part of the bama game" I just don't understand how it was basically accepted as the correct call instead of questioning it which most people do when it is that kind of hit. Just mind boggling to me.
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 9:48 am
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:48 am to tiger25
Normally during reviews the broadcast will go to their rules expert for their opinion/explanation. They didn't even do that.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:53 am to tiger25
There has to be an email or some sort of communication advising the news media to support the SEC decision.
Eventually someone is going to come out or their email woll get exposed and the truth will begin to slowly leak out
Eventually someone is going to come out or their email woll get exposed and the truth will begin to slowly leak out
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News