Delpit'***** on Ruggs: How Was This Not Targeting??
- Thread starter BamaMoon
- Start date
If they allowed themselves to be intimidated, they should be fired or at a minimum suspended and then split up when they return.
I think you have this confused with hitting below the knees.
NCAA football rules regarding roughing the passer:
There was no "passer." The play had been blown dead seconds before. It was a dead ball personal foul under the rules...
I agree the hit on Tua should have been called, but I have seen this happen many times and I don't think I've ever seen the defensive player called for anything.
Regarding the targeting call, I have to agree it was technically targeting. The argument that he had time to move from defenseless to under control doesn't work, because he was entering the end zone as he caught the ball. If this isn't a bang bang play, then the hit is a late hit, and that should have been called as unnecessary roughness.
What is more, Ruggs doesn't duck. He starts to fall, but he doesn't lower his head, he just starts to drop, and he hasn't moved very far when the hit happened. Ultimately, the defensive player went high, which is the reason for the rule. If he had hit lower in the chest area, there wouldn't be a discussion.
All that being said, I have never liked the ejection part of the rule. It is especially a big deal because of the inconsistency. The D. White hit is a perfect example. In reality it was a minor hit, but it was a textbook example of targeting. Just as he gets there he ducks his head and the crown of his helmet hits the QB in the face. He may have hit with his hands first, but crown of helmet to head of QB is going to get called no matter what. Head up and facemark hits, no call. But it was obvious he was pulling up to some extent, which is what makes this a mess. If the hit hadn't been called for targeting, it wouldn't have rated roughing the passer. That is the part that drives me crazy.
Regarding the targeting call, I have to agree it was technically targeting. The argument that he had time to move from defenseless to under control doesn't work, because he was entering the end zone as he caught the ball. If this isn't a bang bang play, then the hit is a late hit, and that should have been called as unnecessary roughness.
What is more, Ruggs doesn't duck. He starts to fall, but he doesn't lower his head, he just starts to drop, and he hasn't moved very far when the hit happened. Ultimately, the defensive player went high, which is the reason for the rule. If he had hit lower in the chest area, there wouldn't be a discussion.
All that being said, I have never liked the ejection part of the rule. It is especially a big deal because of the inconsistency. The D. White hit is a perfect example. In reality it was a minor hit, but it was a textbook example of targeting. Just as he gets there he ducks his head and the crown of his helmet hits the QB in the face. He may have hit with his hands first, but crown of helmet to head of QB is going to get called no matter what. Head up and facemark hits, no call. But it was obvious he was pulling up to some extent, which is what makes this a mess. If the hit hadn't been called for targeting, it wouldn't have rated roughing the passer. That is the part that drives me crazy.
Textbook case of Targeting.
LSU got a lot of home cooking Saturday night in Tiger Stadium.
The fact this was targeting had nothing to do with White getting a Targeting call 2 weeks ago. The call should have stood as Targeting.
LSU got a lot of home cooking Saturday night in Tiger Stadium.
The fact this was targeting had nothing to do with White getting a Targeting call 2 weeks ago. The call should have stood as Targeting.
That's right about Brad and Gary... Normally in a game they'll go back to it 4 or 5 times and show how and why it was targeting, and they didn't. They KNEW it was targeting and the refs call was so they could get out of "Red Stick" without any controversy. Because you know LSU fans would've been screaming bias towards us. But, it should've stuck. But, it didn't matter, we whipped their collective butts up and down the field anyways. That's the Bama D I've been waiting to see all year.
Last edited:
I keep seeing the "it didn't matter" comment...but it DOES matter. It continues the precedence that has been set and there will be a non-call, reversal or made versus bama that will matter and cost us a game, or more importantly, a player (due to injury).
I agree but my point was there is no rule restricting a player from hitting the QB below the waist while there is something about hitting below the knees. The only thing I could figure was Snuffy was confusing this with the rule about forcibly hitting an offensive player that is in passing posture below the knees.
There may have been a foul for leading with the helmet and maybe a foul for hitting after the whistle but there was not a foul for hitting below the waist.
Well I heard their explanation but if anybody on the field knew the whistle had blown it would have been the Refs. Yet here came the DB at warp speed.But your point is about where the hit was placed. Would have been interesting had M. Wilson (Because Carville used his number and name)made that same hit on Burrow. I promise you that there would have been an entirely different explanation and action taken. Not whining. Just saying that those Refs feared the frenzy that Carville started. I agree with what you say, and Tide-HSV is completely correct. Haven't heard an explanation from anyone anywhere who is in officiating as to why that game was handled in that manner. Talk about a destructive practice to manage College Football? If that continues due to fan intimidation..we might be watching who knows what in the future.
Latest threads
-
-
Question: Chris Youngblood did he commit over the weekend?
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-