- 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
1
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:29 am to Ted2010
quote:
That's actually a good post with good points. There defintely needs to be more clarity and a uniform application when it comes to the targeting rule.
At most Devin should have had roughing the passer. He shouldn't have been ejected.
So you're being logical today?
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:30 am to Tigerbyte123
quote:
Just lost all respect for Greg McElroy as an analyst!
Good God, you had respect for him before? I've never seen a more bias analyst in all of college football. ESPN should be ashamed! To come out on national tv and say that LSU has no chance of beating Alabama and will need to score 50 to even keep up? Who in the hell right now today even knows if Alabama will put up 50 on LSU?
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:31 am to Tigerbyte123
Never had respect for him to begin with.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:32 am to Tigerbyte123
quote:
He just said on ESPN Radio that Whites hit was a stupid play with 3 mins left in game.
Whether we as LSU fans like it or not, with the way this rule has been called in the past (maybe not against Alabma), it would have been smart of White to plant his shoulder pad into Fitzgerald's abdomen area....that is the one way to guarantee that there is no contact (real or perceived) to the helmet incidental or otherwise.
I'm not saying it is right but I'm telling you that the players probably need to start accounting for bad calls on this rule.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:33 am to Tigerbyte123
Yup, taking it easy on a bigger running QB that gashed us the entire game....when they still had time to win.
Now we know why he's a commentator and not a coach.
Eta: We saw exactly what happened when Delpit tried to tackle him low. He had to recover, get up from the ground, and chase after a running Fitz
Now we know why he's a commentator and not a coach.
Eta: We saw exactly what happened when Delpit tried to tackle him low. He had to recover, get up from the ground, and chase after a running Fitz
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 8:35 am
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:38 am to Icansee4miles
Dude, get a grip. There is no orchestrated conspiracy. The rule is just terrible.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:40 am to TheDude321
Be honest - this "helmet touching" thing is dumb with respect to this hit - helmets sometimes collide even on tackles at the waist and knee levels. Bodies bend at the ankles, knees, waist and neck. What needs to be determined is whether this was a clear effort to target the head or neck, whether it was a purposeful attempt to lead with the helmet, AND an attempt to injure. If all three aren't applicable, then the worst outcome should be a 15 yd penalty - and that is stretching it.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:47 am to BugAC
quote:
His facemask clearly catches the bottom right hand side of Fitzgerald's facemask.
This is true, but that doesn't make it targeting. The targeting rule doesn't say "any contact." It says "forcible contact." The put that qualifier in there for a reason.
It looks to me that he made forcible contact with the QBs chest, not head and neck area. The face mask came forward, resulting in incidental contact.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:49 am to lsusteve1
The point is that the hit was DEFINITELY not trying to take him out of the game. That’s the whole issue with targeting. It’s when players literally try to hurt a guy. You can tell the contact was there but it clearly wasn’t a violent or dangerous hit. That’s our only hope if there’s any review and reverseal of the call. Alleva is fighting for tiger nation so let’s hope he can come through for once.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 8:51 am to BugAC
quote:
The other issue, is that although most assumed targeting meant leading with the crown of the helmet, it actually doesn't even have to be the crown. It could be any part of the helmet, facemask, shoulders, arms, etc..
Leading means comes first. DW’s hands to chest came first. His helmet to Fitz’s face mask was after the leading hands to chest, incidental, and unintentional.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:04 am to TiggerB8t
First let me say White should not have been flagged for any thing on that play. It was a legal hit.
The hit the Bama player put on the Vols qb was much closer to targeting. The difference in the two calls was the man who called the play.
The fact is had they been swapped in the game they called the bama player would have been flagged and the LSU player would not have been.
The replay official looked at the play and said it could have gone either way 50-50 so he backed the official. In my mind he made the easy call instead of the correct call.
The hit the Bama player put on the Vols qb was much closer to targeting. The difference in the two calls was the man who called the play.
The fact is had they been swapped in the game they called the bama player would have been flagged and the LSU player would not have been.
The replay official looked at the play and said it could have gone either way 50-50 so he backed the official. In my mind he made the easy call instead of the correct call.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:12 am to BugAC
quote:
His facemask clearly catches the bottom right hand side of Fitzgerald's facemask. He was leading with his hands, but his facemask did make contact. Stop being a homer for a second and be rational.
Ok, now about that hit on the Vol's QB....
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:16 am to Herman Frisco
quote:
fact is had they been swapped in the game they called the bama player would have been flagged and the LSU player would not have been
Sorry. I'm not buying this at all. I agree it's not a conspiracy but it seems like there's a double standard, as if refs are scared of Saban. Like the player who was punching the guy on the ground. Any other team and that guy would have been ejected. Less flags are thrown at bama. It's all about money and politics. If you can't see that then you are a bama homer, blind or just a dumbass.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:23 am to Chadwick
Greg is just a BAMA homer.Is now & will always be! 
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:25 am to Ted2010
quote:
At most Devin should have had roughing the passer.
No, he shouldn't have. White was running directly at the quarterback and arrived just as he released the ball. White's rush caused the quarterback to throw the ball early, causing an interception. It was a textbook good play. White pushed the quarterback with his hands to the chest portion of the shoulder pads. There is no penalty here at all and White's good play caused a turnover.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:25 am to taf
quote:Their hands were between each other when the hit happened
It looks to me that he made forcible contact with the QBs chest
quote:For DW's hit, they confirmed the call. It wasn't inconclusive. It was confirmed
The replay official looked at the play and said it could have gone either way 50-50
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 9:28 am
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:31 am to Chadwick
quote:
Ok, now about that hit on the Vol's QB....
What about it? This conversation has nothing to do with the other. And as I stated in my first post, the Tennessee hit was more egregious.
I stated before, he hit the facemask of Fitz with his own facemask. I also stated that the rule is so Subjective it's asinine. But, according to the rule, it's "technically" targeting. The "forcibly" is very subjective and is why the rule is flawed. There should be no subjectivity. It should be a cut and dry rule and the review booth should have more common sense than what they did Saturday night. It was a bullshite call, I stated that in my first post. But it, technically, was correct. But as I stated, the lines between targeting and roughing the passer have never been blurrier
This was my first post
quote:
Here's the thing. By the "letter of the law", technically it was targeting. The problem, is that the rule is so subjective and so open to interpretation that there can never be any consistency to the targeting rule. The other issue, is that although most assumed targeting meant leading with the crown of the helmet, it actually doesn't even have to be the crown. It could be any part of the helmet, facemask, shoulders, arms, etc... Which leads to the question, what is the line between targeting and roughing the passer? Because any late hit on a QB where his upper shoulder pads to helmet area is touched could be considered targeting.
This post was edited on 10/22/18 at 9:33 am
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:36 am to drdoct
Right, and his face was up, not using the crown of the helmet. Google the Garrett Walvoord video from the side. It's on Twitter or Utube. Clean hit leading with his hands, facemask makes minimal contact with the QB. Problem was the review booth did not have a side view. Still a bad call. Roughing the passer at worst. Look at the Bama hit on Tenn. QB, killed him, not even a roughing the passer call. Pathetic.
Posted on 10/22/18 at 9:38 am to bluewatersailor
quote:
Right, and his face was up, not using the crown of the helmet.
The crown of the helmet is not an issue anymore. You can "target" with your hands now.
LINK
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News