VTTW Board Index

I really didn't care who won that game (I dislike both teams). That said, I thought that all three of the critical overturned calls were made correctly.

You can like or dislike the targeting rule and the rule can be debated, but I think that by rule the call was correct.

The reversed TD catch was clearly, to my thinking, trapped against the turf in the end zone.

The reception/fumble/scoop and score was the closest call imo. I think that one could be argued either way, but I told the folks I was watching with at the time that I thought it was incomplete.

**Addendum: the Wisconsin folks are happy with their Big10 brethren, I'll bet. OSU fans gonna be needing a lot of cheese with all of that whine.

I thought the calls were correct....OSU shot themselves in the foot kicking FG's in the first half rather than scoring TD's.

The first quarter it looked like OSU was the much better team and Clemson wasn't use to getting hit in the mouth and OSU was the best team they had played all season by a mile. When Clemson woke up they looked like pretty even teams the rest of the way.

The ball trapped in the end zone was the correct call. The targeting calls have been the most irritating to me. What is a defensive player to do when he's going low to avoid hitting the ball carrier in the head but the ball carrier lowers his head? It should be a penalty for the ball carrier to do that.

But the overturn on the scoop and score IMO was ridiculous. What is a "football move"? If having control of the ball with both hands and taking three steps isn't a football move then you're not going to be able to explain it to me.

danged tiglets.

https://twitter.com/SportsCenter/status/1211136453247414272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1211137879218380800&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2F247sports.com%2FLongFormArticle%2FClemson-Tigers-Ohio-State-Buckeyes-media-crushes-officiating-blown-calls-fumble-targeting-141241747%2F

droner,

I can agree that the scoop and score is very debatable.  I can see both sides of that discussion.  Watching in real time, I thought that it was incomplete.  After watching the slow motion replay, I'm still not convinced that it was a catch but can see that he controls it at least long enough to plant both feet and begin to take another step.  The argument that replay didn't have enough evidence to overturn is a valid one.

On the targeting call, I personally think that had the defender kept his head up he would not have been called for targeting.  'See what you are hitting' and most of the time you will be excluded from that call, imo.  In today's game, the crown of the helmet being used to tackle is almost always going to result in a penalty and ejection and will always lead to debate on the call. 

My biggest problem with targeting, btw, is that ball carriers are allowed to lower the head and use the crown of the helmet without penalty - is that not as dangerous as a tackler doing the same thing?

If that catch in the video I posted above was in the end zone it's called a TD 10 out of 10 times IMO.

I hate both Clemson and OSU but wanted Clemson to lose because they flipping come into Tennessee and rob some top players and will continue to do so as long as they stay at the top.

OSU is up there on my hatred meter with UF, so I'm just glad they lost AND they have something to think "what if" about.   :thumbup:

two quote a tweet:  "OSU is who we thought they were, a team that can't win outside the Bog 10" :naughty: :dunno: :bowrofl: :hi5: :nono: :dance: :dielaughing:

I utterly despise OSU. I want Clemson to lose because of the reasons that Tnphil listed above. I really could not pick a team to pull for in that game.

Droner (AKA The Internet's most Invisible/Visible Poster)

I think the targeting rule needs better definitions than "defenseless player" as part of the criteria.  During one of the UT games (I forget which one) Bituli was tackling the ball carrier and they called him and ejected him for targeting. It was clear that Bituli was tackling the player and had his head down, but the player was also bending over to take the impact on his shoulder pads rather than on his side.  There has to be some clarity given that makes the rule much more clear and able to be adjudged and called rather than the term "defenseless player" being applied.