ASU was without a starting defensive back from targeting in first half.
The inconsistency cost them regardless. If this wasn't targeting (meaning nothing is), they got screwed losing a starter.
Targeting explanation
- Thread starter cedarstrip
- Start date
ASU was without a starting defensive back from targeting in first half.
The inconsistency cost them regardless. If this wasn't targeting (meaning nothing is), they got screwed losing a starter.
I know for sure you can push, not sure if you can lock a guy up and drag him forward.
So the Reggie Bush outrage was just crying?
Talk about a guy for whom both of his "controversies" were literally nothing compared to the norm.
If you're talking about that deep pass and interception by ASU they did review that and not at all similar. He was hit in the shoulder/chest area, and he was clearly attempting to pull up. He could have really lit him up. The announcers and rules analyst all agreed during the review that they didn't think it was targeting. If you're referencing another play I don't recall one.
I don’t remember that specific one. I just remember one time a TE on my team grabbed me and started to pull when I was being tackled. The ref grabbed him and told him he could push but not pull and that was in the mid 80s.
They weren't that similar.
That other hit looked like targeting on the initial view of the play. But another angle showed that the forcible contact was to the chest of the receiver and there was barely any contact at all to the player's helmet.
The truly funny thing here is that an ISU player was flagged for a late hit on that same play and his hit was about two beats before the player flew in and hit Noel. Granted, the hit on Noel wasn't as violent, but it was entirely to the helmet. Probably should have been offsetting late hit penalties.
lol i had not seen that.
That's actually the most intentional helmet to helmet contact i've ever seen while also being the least violent and least consequential.
Not true. The NFL changed the rule to allow the push in 2005. The NCAA followed suit in 2013.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Naw, pushing used to be illegal, too (Reggie Bush illegally pushing Matt Leinhart into the end zone without a flag being thrown to help USC beat Notre Dame was a big deal back in 2005) but that rule was changed in 2013.
I'm not sure if there's anything in college about it but I'm pretty sure in the pros AI is right.
OT: Nothing to do with targeting, but an alltime Texas tears video
Despite WVU having to go for 2 twice, they still get it, beating texas in Austin, with WVU qb giving the double horns down to the crowd when he scored, prompting a call from the Texas AD saying the extra point must be taken off the board and a 15 yard penalty accessed.
www.bing.com
Despite WVU having to go for 2 twice, they still get it, beating texas in Austin, with WVU qb giving the double horns down to the crowd when he scored, prompting a call from the Texas AD saying the extra point must be taken off the board and a 15 yard penalty accessed.
youtube texas pass interference against wvu not called - Search Videos
Watch videos instantly on Bing—enjoy direct playback, discover related clips, and dive into trending content all in one place.
I was surprised it was not called targeting
But I do think they are calling it less than they originally did. The first year or two it seemed any crazy hard collision was targeting.
Only argument for that play to not be targeting that I could see used would be the defender did not lower his head from what I remember. I think it was more straight on helmet to helmet then defender spearing with crown of helmet. You could argue he didn't mean to target. Not saying that means it wasn't.
But I do think they are calling it less than they originally did. The first year or two it seemed any crazy hard collision was targeting.
Only argument for that play to not be targeting that I could see used would be the defender did not lower his head from what I remember. I think it was more straight on helmet to helmet then defender spearing with crown of helmet. You could argue he didn't mean to target. Not saying that means it wasn't.
I was happy he scored, but surprised announcers didn't say that was illegal. I don't think linemen should be able pick up and carry or toss ball carrier forward.
Because there are teams in the ACC that the SEC wants. So they want to keep them valuable to peel them out of the ACC. The b12 has been raided so much that we are the leftovers.
I actually think a federal DA should open an investigation and question the officials under oath. With the money involved, i think it is clear that the call is 100 percent wrong, and obviously wrong on replay. so, what was the motivation to make a wrong call? As a prosecutor i would make certain it wasnt monetary.
I saw in person, and it was targetting. We could FEEL it in the stands. During the review, there were two Texas fans behind me talking and after the replay on the board flat out said: "Yep, that is classic targetting." That being said, I also thought the interception by ASU was targetting that was not called either. Not as blatant, but just as blatantly, not called. So, that evened it out. Plus, The Sun Devils have a really bad kicking game which is why they kept going for it on 4th down and manageable. There was no guarantee they would have made a FG to win the game, and it is definitely not why they lost the game.
Feel the same. Who cares what happens next? These games are not for us. Though they might be slightly Interesting, but I'll just wait for half of these guys to go pro 'n just watch the NFL. It's pro now anyways and a slanted playing field at that.
Yes #1
Yes #2
Congrats to ASU for making a good run. You and we (the Big 12) got squeezed again. The Big 12 shoulda had 2 teams in. ASU was going uphill when it mattered. The golder boy, TX was still pretty lucky to win, a little good, yes, but so what. That is all.
