Toggle sidebar

Targeting on iowa st

C

cubsker_rivals142943

All-Conference
May 29, 2003
18,603
3,797
0
Anyone see that? Hit him completely with his shoulder in the head as the guy fell down backwards. There was literally no other body part he could have hit first.

ISU guy was conf defensive frosh of the year and he's gone 30 seconds into the game.

Ridiculous
 
Redscarlet

Redscarlet

Heisman
Jun 17, 2001
33,063
11,063
113
They really need to revisit this before next season...
players should not be disqualified for a questionable judgement call .....
 
S

steinek11

All-Conference
Apr 18, 2004
13,515
1,252
113
I watched the replay a couple of times. I think it's the right call. He tried to put his shoulder into the receivers head intentionally. It was unnecessary IMO. I'll turn in my man card for the day.
 
Redscarlet

Redscarlet

Heisman
Jun 17, 2001
33,063
11,063
113
drubendall said:
I watched the replay a couple of times. I think it's the right call. He tried to put his shoulder into the receivers head intentionally. It was unnecessary IMO. I'll turn in my man card for the day.
Click to expand...

A player shouldn’t have to be ejected from a game for just one judgment call..They need revisit that whole rule..It’s unfair for one incident...
 
S

steinek11

All-Conference
Apr 18, 2004
13,515
1,252
113
scarletred said:
A player shouldn’t have to be ejected from a game for just one judgment call..They need revisit that whole rule..It’s unfair for one incident...
Click to expand...
I'll agree with that. The speed of the game is such that it's hard to perfectly place your upper body when job 1 is to make a play or make a stop.
 
Swiv3D

Swiv3D

Sophomore
Dec 19, 2018
1,017
112
63
That punt return could've had 2 targeting calls that didn't even get reviewed. I'm glad they didn't, but this stupid rule is so inconsistent. The penalty isn't actually about player safety at this point, it's just virtue signalling.
 
S

schuele

All-American
Apr 17, 2005
21,124
5,734
0
Man, that last play by ISU was a total cluster----. Reminded me of the BB coach whose team comes storming back from a big deficit to get within a point or two, then on the last possession he insists on drawing up something on a white board that completely paralyzes his team.
 
5

54T

Freshman
Aug 20, 2020
1,136
84
0
drubendall said:
I watched the replay a couple of times. I think it's the right call. He tried to put his shoulder into the receivers head intentionally. It was unnecessary IMO. I'll turn in my man card for the day.
Click to expand...
If a Nebraska receiver got hit like that, and targeting wasn’t called, this board would go into complete meltdown. It was reviewed and QUICKLY confirmed.
 
N

NECoach31BB

Senior
Mar 8, 2002
17,723
651
0
What does the defender do differently since it looks like he is already into the tackle that doesn’t force the targeting call and prevents himself from injury?
 
S

Scat_Back

Redshirt
Sep 5, 2018
5,093
2
2
Yes sir I ended up hitting them in the first quarter. Packers rolling the Panthers. Good good day 😁
 
S

steinek11

All-Conference
Apr 18, 2004
13,515
1,252
113
Did you see where Iowa Stated offense drew them offsides several times on fourth and two and the refs wouldn't call it. The line judge needs to never work again. He's either completely blind or corrupt beyond measure. Campbell was losing his mind and rightfully so.
 
5

54T

Freshman
Aug 20, 2020
1,136
84
0
drubendall said:
Did you see where Iowa Stated offense drew them offsides several times on fourth and two and the refs wouldn't call it. The line judge needs to never work again. He's either completely blind or corrupt beyond measure. Campbell was losing his mind and rightfully so.
Click to expand...
If there is no contact, and the encroachment doesn’t cause an offensive lineman to move or flinch, and the defender gets back onside before the snap - it’s not a penalty. Campbell was wrong. The refs had it right. He should have been upset at his own center for not snapping the ball while the defender was in the neutral zone.
 
C

cubsker_rivals142943

All-Conference
May 29, 2003
18,603
3,797
0
54T said:
If there is no contact, and the encroachment doesn’t cause an offensive lineman to move or flinch, and the defender gets back onside before the snap - it’s not a penalty. Campbell was wrong. The refs had it right. He should have been upset at his own center for not snapping the ball while the defender was in the neutral zone.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too. OL needs to react.
 
H

huskerdrb

Sophomore
Feb 3, 2004
1,337
103
63
Two things. The defensive back smoked him in the head/neck area when the receiver was about to land on his butt. It defines defenseless and it defines unnecessary. It was a cheap shot.
Second thing. I have seen defensive encroachment called on way less of a move across the line of scrimmage than that. In real time I don’t know how the line judge didn’t think contact wasn’t made. Iowa State had a genuine beef on that play.
 
5

54T

Freshman
Aug 20, 2020
1,136
84
0
I went back and watched it again, because lord knows I am often wrong. There was no contact on the encroachment. It was close, but no contact. So, in real time, the line judge got it right. There was no reaction by any offensive lineman. The ball was never snapped. The defenders got back out of the neutral zone. What are the refs supposed to do? It’s not offsides because there was “almost” contact. I thought they showed remarkable restraint by not flagging Campbell for a 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom