Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
28 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

Ok. You’re right. They spotted the ball favorably for us for a change. I’ll take it. 

Petrino was asked about this in the PC and he actually thought *Arkansas* got a favorable spot on that punt.  So ackshually it does fit the thread narrative.

(Should start at right spot but jump to 7:30 otherwise…)

 

In the stadium I thought it went out of bounds much closer to the LOS than to where it landed.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
43 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

Ok. You’re right. They spotted the ball favorably for us for a change. I’ll take it. 

When a right-footed punter mishits it, which he obviously did, you can have a fair amount of right to left movement, which is why it came back toward the sideline where it landed despite going out much closer to the line of scrimmage.

 

Posted
16 minutes ago, Rudiger said:

When a right-footed punter mishits it, which he obviously did, you can have a fair amount of right to left movement, which is why it came back toward the sideline where it landed despite going out much closer to the line of scrimmage.

 

I was humoring the bitch of a poster who expects us to care if our opponent gets fucked. We get fucked constantly, like when their back had the run down the left sideline and their OL was tackling our players. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

Anybody got a clip of the targeting by Ty Smith? I was watching the skycast and, not only was there no replay, but they cut to commercial on review. When the broadcast came back, 1st and 10 arky.

Reciever is defenseless, therefore the rule becomes any contact to head or neck area with a targeting indicator,  which in this cause would be launching I guess.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

So just what I thought, bs. He's got his head up, targets the shoulder, and it's bang bang. My problem is, what do you tell him in film study to prevent that call next time?

And it's not just the first half, it's the entire aggy game, right?

Posted
2 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

So just what I thought, bs. He's got his head up, targets the shoulder, and it's bang bang. My problem is, what do you tell him in film study to prevent that call next time?

And it's not just the first half, it's the entire aggy game, right?

It’s the first half against Aggy.  
 

and I guess tell him to run through the player instead of lunging/launching. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

It’s the first half against Aggy.  
 

and I guess tell him to run through the player instead of lunging/launching. 

lol it was a perfect form tackle, the Ark WR is listed at 5-8… Ant Hill would have hit that dude with his belly button 

Edited by lilMAC25
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

lol it was a perfect form tackle, the Ark WR is listed at 5-8… Ant Hill would have hit that dude with his belly button 

Understood and agree. But current rules are current rules and was trying to answer the question earnestly. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Welch said:

Petrino was asked about this in the PC and he actually thought *Arkansas* got a favorable spot on that punt.  So ackshually it does fit the thread narrative.

(Should start at right spot but jump to 7:30 otherwise…)

 

In the stadium I thought it went out of bounds much closer to the LOS than to where it landed.

my seat at the stadium had a perfect angle to see the punt, and to my eye it was called accurately.  It had weird spin where it was out of bounds but not slicing away, so it was consistently a few feet wide, but consistently so.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, lilMAC25 said:

lol it was a perfect form tackle, the Ark WR is listed at 5-8… Ant Hill would have hit that dude with his belly button 

That's the problem with the play.  If he was a normal size receiver that hit is on the tape as a great defensive play.  I've always hated that the rule isn't adjusted for intent or form and only looks at outcome.  Can't remember who it was but years back someone slid or ducked last second right into a helmet of our defender who had zero time to react and got dinged with targeting.

  • Like 1
Posted

Watch international test-level rugby. The rules were changed to minimize any contact with a call-carrier’s head. Head contact has been substantially reduced, and players are still able to make tackles.

Posted
58 minutes ago, Skipper said:

That's the problem with the play.  If he was a normal size receiver that hit is on the tape as a great defensive play.  I've always hated that the rule isn't adjusted for intent or form and only looks at outcome.  Can't remember who it was but years back someone slid or ducked last second right into a helmet of our defender who had zero time to react and got dinged with targeting.

Our player was Gary Johnson. Between inseminating women. 

  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

and I guess tell him to run through the player instead of lunging/launching. 

That's fair. 

6 hours ago, lilMAC25 said:

lol it was a perfect form tackle, the Ark WR is listed at 5-8… Ant Hill would have hit that dude with his belly button 

 

6 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Understood and agree. But current rules are current rules and was trying to answer the question earnestly. 

 

2 hours ago, TrashMaster G said:

I must be missing the helmet-to-helmet contact. Looks to me like he hits the receiver in the shoulder.

Watching it over and over, I think it's strictly because of the "launching" like Pato says. Not a call I'd be screaming made if it were one of our players, but whatever. 

Posted
7 hours ago, BigHorn'13 said:

So just what I thought, bs. He's got his head up, targets the shoulder, and it's bang bang. My problem is, what do you tell him in film study to prevent that call next time?

And it's not just the first half, it's the entire aggy game, right?

Take him out, you gotta keep ‘em separated.

Posted
24 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

Watching it over and over, I think it's strictly because of the "launching" like Pato says. Not a call I'd be screaming made if it were one of our players, but whatever. 

It's absolute bullshit that the review confirmed it. Targeting should not be a call where you default to the call on the field if the video is inconclusive. The video should HAVE to confirm it because the stakes are so high.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

It's absolute bullshit that the review confirmed it. Targeting should not be a call where you default to the call on the field if the video is inconclusive. The video should HAVE to confirm it because the stakes are so high.

they need to have level of targeting such that you can declare that you aren't out for the next game or half.

Posted

I'm not seeing a launch there. Just a full-speed hit and a pretty good wrap-up with Smith's head clearly up. Left foot is firmly planted until he goes down with the tackle. Seems like it would be pretty tough not to leave your feet when you've obliterated the guy at speed and have him wrapped up.

If there is any launch, it's one-footed and after contact. Does that fit the definition?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Hayduke said:

I'm not seeing a launch there. Just a full-speed hit and a pretty good wrap-up with Smith's head clearly up. Left foot is firmly planted until he goes down with the tackle. Seems like it would be pretty tough not to leave your feet when you've obliterated the guy at speed and have him wrapped up.

If there is any launch, it's one-footed and after contact. Does that fit the definition?

this is what I am wondering, he isn't off the ground until well after he makes contact.  sure he is leaning forward but he's not off the ground at all.

but then again the whole targeting thing is BS in my opinion unless you are hitting with the crown of the helmet or throwing forearm shivers to the head.

Edited by dcar00
Posted

Sob these refs. Screw the sec. Blatantly scripted for atm to win. Sark needs to channel his inner will muschamp, 2 no calls cost Texas 14 points or 6 at minimum

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Jshep34 said:

Sob these refs. Screw the sec. Blatantly scripted for atm to win. Sark needs to channel his inner will muschamp, 2 no calls cost Texas 14 points or 6 at minimum

You know it’s a 15 yard penalty in college, right?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Helobious said:

I still laugh at people that thought Big 12 refs were uniquely shitty or anything like that. 

They were unique in that we would’ve had a flag, then a review there for 5 mins, then a meeting on the field, then picked up the flag lol

they were sloppy with rigging the games

 

Have the SEC refs called holding on any offensive linemen on us all year?

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Zeus said:

lol more flags on us 

“after the play” unnecessary roughness for tackling a guy 

what a joke the SEC is

Rollerball GIF by Filmin

Game? This wasn't meant to be a game?

Posted
12 minutes ago, Zeus said:

lol more flags on us 

“after the play” unnecessary roughness for tackling a guy 

what a joke the SEC is

that one was legit . he picked him up and slammed him down- illegal 

Non PI were horse shit 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, nineliveslost said:

that one was legit . he picked him up and slammed him down- illegal 

Non PI were horse shit 

Whistle had not been blown. What was he supposed to do?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

First down Texas

and it’s a hold on us to negate it of course

18 minutes ago, nineliveslost said:

uhh not lift him up and slam him down backwards???

Thems the rules homies 

Yeah I can’t wait until we see that called on someone against us

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Zeus said:

First down Texas

and it’s a hold on us to negate it of course

Yeah I can’t wait until we see that called on someone against us

man, I'm not saying it doesnt suck and I am not agreeing with the way this game is being refed but it is what it is 

Posted

“Missed” obvious false start

Just now, nineliveslost said:

man, I'm not saying it doesnt suck and I am not agreeing with the way this game is being refed but it is what it is 

If it was called the same both ways, fine. But it’s just not. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
that one was legit . he picked him up and slammed him down- illegal 
Non PI were horse shit 

Was it a personal foul when it was done to Texas by UGA? No?
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Nivek said:


Was it a personal foul when it was done to Texas by UGA? No?

Yeah thanks for reminding me. I knew it had happened to us recently. It’s fucking bullshit

36 minutes ago, Zeus said:

“Missed” obvious false start

If it was called the same both ways, fine. But it’s just not. 

Yeah it’s not. It’s not fair at all and that’s more infuriating than anything. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...