|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1,521
|
Heisman Winner [133534]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26343
Joined: 9/18/12
|
probably Germans but if Boulware hit the NCState RB the way
Oct 17, 2016, 3:46 PM
|
|
Gallman was hit, he's called for targeting?
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [20884]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4483
Joined: 6/27/05
|
Ejected for sure
Oct 17, 2016, 3:48 PM
|
|
just more ACC BS
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1512]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 3475
Joined: 7/4/13
|
Re: Ejected for sure
Oct 17, 2016, 4:03 PM
|
|
ACC officiating is beyond horrible game in and game out. Don't know where they get these guys but they sure can't seem to get things right before their eyes!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2669]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 8366
Joined: 8/12/14
|
Re: probably Germans but if Boulware hit the NCState RB the way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:05 PM
|
|
Yes. The idiot coots are talking about how it was a great and clean hit.
If it was Boulware, they would be wanting him to be arrested for assault. They are so delusional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5280]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6926
Joined: 11/5/12
|
Re: probably Germans but if Boulware hit the NCState RB the way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:18 PM
|
|
Coot logic at it's finest:
This is a clean hit (crown of helmet to helmet, shoulder is not leading):
This is not and is dirty (arm hitting shoulder, several inches of jersey fabric showing between the arm and his neck):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2721]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2059
Joined: 7/21/03
|
Re: probably Germans but if Boulware hit the NCState RB the way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:10 PM
|
|
And you would support him being ejected right? Since it was unmistakably targeting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20884]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4483
Joined: 6/27/05
|
It would suck balls but as long as the refs call it both way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:19 PM
|
|
both ways I can accept it. The problem is They ALWAYS screw Clemson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2721]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2059
Joined: 7/21/03
|
Re: It would suck balls but as long as the refs call it both way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:37 PM
|
|
I'm certainly with you in terms of consistency with the call. I do not think the hit on Wayne was targeting (my subjective opinion). He certainly led with the crown, but Wayne lowered his level to make contact. If Wayne was upright he would have been hit in the hip. It's so hard to determine intent, but I think the State kid was just playing football. Their defense was being the kind of physical we appreciate at Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [81]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 342
Joined: 3/18/13
|
Re: It would suck balls but as long as the refs call it both way
Oct 17, 2016, 4:48 PM
|
|
I agree with the previous poster. I do not think it was targeting
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4947]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6980
Joined: 10/12/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20884]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4483
Joined: 6/27/05
|
According to rule 9-1-3 it dosen't matter
Oct 17, 2016, 5:10 PM
[ in reply to Re: It would suck balls but as long as the refs call it both way ] |
|
Targeting and Initiating Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)
No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2721]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2059
Joined: 7/21/03
|
Re: According to rule 9-1-3 it dosen't matter
Oct 17, 2016, 8:40 PM
|
|
You guys can quote the rules all you like, but it is still subjective. That's why there is little consistency across the nation with this call. I am saying it was not called and I would not want it to be called in this instance or others like it. He led with the crown (which is more dangerous for him) but was trying to put his hat on the ball. We can argue back and forth all you want, but the fact of the matter is, officials don't really agree upon what constitutes a targeting foul, and since fans rarely agree on anything, there is no reason to believe they would do so on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [133534]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26343
Joined: 9/18/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1,521
|
|
|
50
