Author Topic: Targeting rule  (Read 1232 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 22430
    • View Profile
Targeting rule
« on: August 31, 2013, 04:59:00 PM »
If this leads to NBA style flopping, it will be horrible.


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37958
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2013, 07:31:31 PM »
I think it's a good rule. I mean it's not that hard to not hit somebody with the crown of your helmet.

Offline BobBarker

  • Don't forget to spay and neuter your pets!
  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2013, 07:56:08 PM »
yeah, but this is how they get everything started and it will eventually lead to them taking away all of our guns.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2013, 08:40:17 PM »
I thought the aTm player that was tossed got a raw deal. I know they went to a review, but I didn't catch the conclusion, anyone fill me in?
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37958
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2013, 09:37:32 PM »
I thought the aTm player that was tossed got a raw deal. I know they went to a review, but I didn't catch the conclusion, anyone fill me in?

Seriously?



I mean there is absolutely nothing wrong with this being called targeting.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2013, 09:48:52 PM »
I thought the aTm player that was tossed got a raw deal. I know they went to a review, but I didn't catch the conclusion, anyone fill me in?

Seriously?



I mean there is absolutely nothing wrong with this being called targeting.
Well that replay makes the hit look better than other views.  I guess the kid did get tossed and has to sit the first half of the next game. 
Other views make it look a lot worse.  I think the refs were thinking there was more of a launching component to the rule, but I think the ejection only occurs if the crown is used.    :dunno: could be wrong though.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37958
    • View Profile
Re: Targeting rule
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2013, 09:59:13 PM »
I thought the aTm player that was tossed got a raw deal. I know they went to a review, but I didn't catch the conclusion, anyone fill me in?

Seriously?



I mean there is absolutely nothing wrong with this being called targeting.
Well that replay makes the hit look better than other views.  I guess the kid did get tossed and has to sit the first half of the next game. 
Other views make it look a lot worse.  I think the refs were thinking there was more of a launching component to the rule, but I think the ejection only occurs if the crown is used.    :dunno: could be wrong though.

The ball was about 15 feet away from the receiver, who had stopped running before the defender even set up for launch. It was the type of douchey "big hit" that absolutely needs to go away if football is going to have any sort of future.