It's all part of the powder puff movement in football. He didn't launch, his didn't lead with the crown of the helmet. It's just plain a bad rule. That gave SC a late TD.
Bama Game Thread: Official Game Thread Bama vs. USCe, 2nd Half...
- Thread starter TIDE-HSV
- Start date
- Status
Because it's a perfect form tackle?
Their helmets touched facemask to facemask and he wrapped him up around the chest and shoulders. Perfection. I'd hope to hit every defender, including the quarterback with that technique every single time. Apparently a perfect tackle is targeting.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Lots to learn from in this game, but I'll take a 24 point victory over an SEC foe any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
RTR
RTR
Need to see if any family members of this officiating crew gets a lump sum payment this week.
Troll much? I guess you have to watch someone other than Clemson if you want to see a game.
He wanted a flag on the hit.
My point was that there shouldn't have been a hit. He was too focused on making the hit and missed making the play. He should have had his eyes up, made the pick, ran for six points, and paraded the "Ball-Out Belt" around the sideline.
I agree, but there will be at least one of those in every college game played these days. That was a good, clean, hard hit. I keep trying to accept the changes in the game, but it isn't easy.
That was utter crap. Completely egregious. Did not launch. Did not touch the head or neck. Did not hit late. And to have the stupid announcer ref agree with the call.
I know it's meaningless at this point (unless you bet on the game), but that has to be one of the worst calls I've every seen. Muschamp got in the refs heads.
I know it's meaningless at this point (unless you bet on the game), but that has to be one of the worst calls I've every seen. Muschamp got in the refs heads.
Sorry, but you're wrong - form tackle is facemask to the chest. Been that way for a century.
That was targeting, whether you guys like it or not. YOU CANNOT HIT THE QB IN THE HEAD. It's not really debatable...
Because targeting by definition includes malicious intent. I don't think the intent was there, he was just making a play. It was too high but it was more like a bear hug that leading with the helmet. Like I said, I understand why it was called though.
I disagree that he hit him in the head at all. There is a certain point where it is completey incidental and unavoidable unless we want to put flags on them and stop tackling.
Bogus:
1) he hit him just before hit let the pass go.
2) barmore was trying to hit him to disrupt the throw.
3) it was face mask to face mask. No lower head, no launching, no intent to injury him.
I understand “forceable” contact to the head and shoulders but some of this stuff isn just football.
1) he hit him just before hit let the pass go.
2) barmore was trying to hit him to disrupt the throw.
3) it was face mask to face mask. No lower head, no launching, no intent to injury him.
I understand “forceable” contact to the head and shoulders but some of this stuff isn just football.
Well, maybe you could go personal foul for hitting him in the head, but I still say it shouldn't be targeting as his head was up and he didn't launch. Two plays from the end, and now he has to sit out a half for that.
It was targeting, but that is not the type of hit that they were trying to eliminate from the game when they first implemented it. The QB was not defenseless. He was stepping into a pass when he was hit. He took that risk, and I respect that, but he got hit because he put himself at risk, not because the defender did anything wrong, IMO. The helmets barely touched. ticky, tack call.
- Status
Latest threads
-
Chattanooga VW Plant Union Vote- Started by 92tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Political Meme - Cartoon/Joke Thread...Part XX
- Started by Bazza
- Replies: 9
-
US Army replacing 5.56mm rifle with a 6.8mm for infantry- Started by Tidewater
- Replies: 6
-