- 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: Of all the frames, this one seems most telling...(yet some still defending the call!!!??)
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:25 pm to HighRoller
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:25 pm to HighRoller
Hands clearly at the chest area (not head) and he is intentionally Keeping his head behind his hands imv. If they spent more than 10 seconds reviewing it would be clear.
Then there is the litany of calls made on far more egregious hits by bama than this. That’s what’s most disturbing , but expected
Then there is the litany of calls made on far more egregious hits by bama than this. That’s what’s most disturbing , but expected
1
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:26 pm to tigerfoot
quote:
in excess of what a normal tackle would require
I'll take obscure undefined shite for 500 Alex
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:26 pm to tigerfoot
Clearly broke it...would this definition include the front of shoulder pad below the neck while in the process of "checking-up" in the forceful contact and even putting an arm immediately behind to lessen and support the hittee?
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:30 pm to tigerfoot
That happened to Burrow twice last night...no call.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:31 pm to Lsuchampnj
Helmet to helmet
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:32 pm to HighRoller
Great pics. Clearly shows head up, forearm to the chest. If there is any contact with head or neck area it is incidental at worst.
The most I've seen on replay is maybe a grazing touch of the facemasks.
That is not targeting.
The most I've seen on replay is maybe a grazing touch of the facemasks.
That is not targeting.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:34 pm to tigerfoot
Defenseless player .... nope
Contact to the head or neck .... nope
SEC explanation .... launched .... nope
Contact to the head or neck .... nope
SEC explanation .... launched .... nope
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:38 pm to Ted2010
>13k posts on an opponent’s message board. Double digit posts today alone. How sad is your life?
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:40 pm to tigerfoot
The chest and neck are two different body parts.
When you get a sec, ask someone to explain it to you who isn't functionally retarded.
When you get a sec, ask someone to explain it to you who isn't functionally retarded.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:41 pm to Lsuchampnj
If he would have planted his helmet into the QBs neck, breaking his collarbone, he'd be playing 4 quarters in two weeks. Oh well.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:41 pm to TigerKnights
By definition he was “defenseless.”
However, there was not forcible contact to head and neck. He hit his chest. Fitz’ head came forward, which lead to incidental contact between face masks.
However, there was not forcible contact to head and neck. He hit his chest. Fitz’ head came forward, which lead to incidental contact between face masks.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:49 pm to BillyBobfan24_7
No it wasn’t. There was no tackle made. It was illegal contact.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:49 pm to taf
Incidental contact is not forceable contact
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:53 pm to tigerfoot
You keep saying he went in high, and that is the problem. However, if he had lowered his head, that would have been targeting. You can't have it both ways.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:53 pm to tigerfoot
White actually led with his hands
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:54 pm to tigerfoot
quote:Yup
Defenseless player...check.
Contact to the head or neck area.....check.
Yes, targeting.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:54 pm to tigerfoot
Yes Because he stopped short of Taking him all the way to the ground...actually softening the impact with his other arm.... I really didn’t expect to see anyone defending the call after seeing this. Clearly those who do are seeing what they want to see.
Posted on 10/21/18 at 4:59 pm to tigerfoot
quote:
Now that you admit it is targeting, you can work on changing the NCAA defenseless player definition.
Defenseless player is only a precondition for the call. He did not have forceable contact to the head or neck area which negates Targeting but not a late hit/PF/roughing the passer. If you look he hit him squarely in the chest area.
This post was edited on 10/21/18 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 10/21/18 at 5:04 pm to Powerman
quote:i agree. That is how forcible can be defined in the rule itself.
take obscure undefined shite for 500 Alex
Posted on 10/21/18 at 5:05 pm to Lsuchampnj
I think the call was bullshite but this angle is not close to being the best
Any idiot could argue that the helmets just collided off of each other
Just watch the fricking play in real time it's obvious in live action
Any idiot could argue that the helmets just collided off of each other
Just watch the fricking play in real time it's obvious in live action
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News