- 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
re: Watching the game again and the hit on Burrow
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:41 pm to Alt26
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:41 pm to Alt26
quote:
It was a legal hit that LSU fans would be proudly playing over and over again if the roles were reversed.
They were talking about targeting, which it was not, but it WAS a peel back block, which has been illegal in the NCAA for at least 3-4 years. Did I miss a rule change?
1
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:50 pm to JambalayaAintAllThat
In some situations, yes. They weren’t overly aggressive despite the domination by our bad news bears defense.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:54 pm to PuraVida
quote:
it was trash...pure and simple.
Well, to all the college referees who replied to my post, I'll go ahead and take the actual game officials and replay offices word for it. And if I remember correctly, there was no call for targeting and there was no ejection.
quote:
The taunting after the play was a penalty, as well.
I agree with the taunting being a penalty. And if I remember correctly, the officials called that penalty.
quote:
Read the rule book retard!
Perhaps you should retard!
The game officials, you know those guys, the ones who are paid to officiate the game and are paid to know the rules, didn't see it as targeting and didn't throw a flag on the hit.
But you want me to take the word of a pissed off fan on the rant?
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:56 pm to earl keese
quote:
The game officials, you know those guys, the ones who are paid to officiate the game and are paid to know the rules, didn't see it as targeting and didn't throw a flag on the hit.
So your position is that refs are never wrong
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:01 pm to Alt26
quote:
It was a legal hit
Nothing legal or ethical about it. It was a dirty play which I believe was designed to get Burrow out of the game for good. Fortunately we have a superman as QB who doesn't go down easily.
I don't think I've been as mad about a penalty no-call, since a game vs Auburn in 2007 where two offensive linemen chopblocked Glen Dorsey. He was never the same after that injury.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:02 pm to LSUButt
quote:
People saying it was a clean hit have literally zero idea what the rule is. Defenseless player with the crown hitting the head OR NECK area. You’re going to tell me he hit his shoulder? I DVRd the game and I’ve watched the play 10 times. It is a crackback block, therefore Joe was 100% defenseless. He had to hit him in the chest or lower, that did not come close to happening
His left shoulder hit Burrow's right shoulder first. Burrow's head comes forward from the hit and hits 91's helmet.
Look at the way Burrow spun.
ETA - he actually hits him in the armpit
This post was edited on 1/1/19 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:04 pm to ffishstik
quote:
They were talking about targeting, which it was not, but it WAS a peel back block, which has been illegal in the NCAA for at least 3-4 years. Did I miss a rule change?
Blind side blocks aren't illegal unless they're targeting specifically.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:04 pm to Alt26
quote:naw baw
was a legal hit that LSU fans would be proudly playing over and over again if the roles were reversed.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:15 pm to TigerOnTheMountain
Why did the refs pick up the flag for the hit on Burrow that was out of bounds?
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:17 pm to hob
Are you ready for this answer? Prepare yourself for the rabbit hole, my friend.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:17 pm to OceanMan
quote:
So your position is that refs are never wrong
I don't recall saying that.
But I do want to say thank you for your reply to my first post. You were polite and explained your position of this particular play.
I appreciate the way you handled it.
It was a lot better then being called a retard.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:18 pm to slackster
quote:
His left shoulder hit Burrow's right shoulder first. Burrow's head comes forward from the hit and hits 91's helmet.
It's still a crackback block against a "defenseless" player. Should have been unneccesarry roughness at least.
This post was edited on 1/1/19 at 8:20 pm
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:20 pm to slackster
quote:
slackster
I guess people just see what they want to see.
Looks like a clean hit to me. Glad Joe got up and showed his toughness.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:23 pm to KamaCausey_LSU
quote:
It's still a crackback block against a "defenseless" player. Should have been unneccesarry roughness at least.
The foul is only if you hit a guy who is out of the play. Burrow is giving chase. Hard to argue he's out of the play.
I agree the hit was shady, but it's a hit that you cannot currently cover in the rules. Meanwhile, BS like Delpit's hit is "textbook" targeting.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:25 pm to earl keese
quote:
It was a good, solid, clean hit.
The truth is, the NCAA/NFL would rather players crack ribs and tear up knees rather than crack their skulls.
This hit, 10" lower, would have done just as much damage but would have been completely fine in the their eyes.
I really don't know if one alternative is better than the other to be honest. Rugby has successfully taken head shots out of their sport. Why can't football?
This post was edited on 1/1/19 at 8:28 pm
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:26 pm to catholictigerfan
And that is the point of the rule. No cheap shots.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:32 pm to slackster
quote:
The foul is only if you hit a guy who is out of the play. Burrow is giving chase. Hard to argue he's out of the play.
When that play happened, I originally thought it was a dirty hit and would draw a foul. And when the flag was thrown for the player who stood over Burrow taunting him, I thought the flag was for the hit.
But after they showed the replay, it was obvious to me that Burrow was trying to get to the DB to try to make the tackle. After that, in my opinion, what I saw was a good clean hit.
I understand people being pissed off about the hit. But I thought it was a good no-call by the refs,
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:36 pm to earl keese
quote:
I understand people being pissed off about the hit.
After seeing what Devin White was penalized targetting for, can you really blame people for wanting this to be called targetting?
It all boils down to consistency of the call by the refs.
This post was edited on 1/1/19 at 8:37 pm
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:38 pm to earl keese
it was not a clean hit by rule. he launched and hit him in the head and shoulder.
But he def hit him in the side of the head with his helmet.
Did you not see the abrasion along Joe's jaw ? That was not from a hit to the armpit !!!!!
But he def hit him in the side of the head with his helmet.
Did you not see the abrasion along Joe's jaw ? That was not from a hit to the armpit !!!!!
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:46 pm to BlackCoffeeKid
quote:
After seeing what Devin White was penalized targeting for, can you really blame people for wanting this to be called targetting?
Well, I did say I understand people being pissed off about the hit on Burrow. Neither hit (White's or today's) was targeting and neither should have been called.
quote:
It all boils down to consistency of the calls by the refs.
I agree with what you're saying. But to be honest, there will always be inconsistencies with calls from game to game.
Take the Brad Wing taunting call against Florida in 2011 for example. That exact same weekend, I saw the same kind of play in another game (BIG10 I think) that wasn't called.
It sucks, but that's just the way it is.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News