It ain’t over yet
1 Like
Yet another example of how officiating changes games
100%, I’m just saying what I want to happen
1 Like
Holy sheet.
No dog in the fight, but if that’s targetting with a disqualification, may as well make it two hand touch. SMH
Clear as day targeting, no?? Contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless receiver no?
Those are the rules, doesn’t need to be helmet to helmet
with intent to attack? DQ? You’re kidding me, he;s making a tackle. Its tackle football. I think?
3 Likes
Them are the rules, I didn’t write them. Disagree with the rule makers if you want to.
Personally I am okay with them taking the head shots out of football though. My biggest issue is the tackling the QB below the knees rule
1 Like
Its the right call, but he fumbled picked up by osu. Kinda of silly.
Credit goes to OSU, they win the games they are supposed to & lose the games they are supposed to
1 Like
Wasn’t helmet to helmet as well. Where was he supposed to hit low. So he hurts his teammate
The rule isn’t helmet to helmet, it’s contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless receiver
Its pretty soft though. I know the rule. But need to call it all the time
1 Like
Wow, terrible officiating on that one in MO/AL
MO QB lucky to not be done for the day.
1 Like
I don’t think it’s soft. Those are some serious shots, especially when you consider how big, strong, and fast these guys are today.
The calling of it is very inconsistent I agree with you on that
I dont know what kid was supposed to do though.
1 Like
Agreed, that is the worst thing about this targeting rule.
Very little consistency
2 Likes
Nevermind
FTR, I don’t the flag should have been thrown on that one, if you don’t hear the whistle.
The ABC rules guy said he had the same call in a game and he didn’t penalize the defender.
I really have no clue what they called that on.