|
Title: Two things Post by: Creek Walker on October 02, 2016, 05:19:27 EDT Apparently I don't know football rules as well as I thought I did.
1.) Why was the Dobbs touchdown just before the half so controversial? The referee announced that the play "stands" after replay, as opposed to "confirmed," which meant that there wasn't definitive evidence that Dobbs scored, but they couldn't overturn it. UGA fans insist that Dobbs didn't score. I've always been taught that the goal line extends to infinity. Dobbs may have been five yards out of bounds but he never TOUCHED out of bounds until he was obviously past the pylon. Even the poor video angle makes that very evident. 2.) How was the helmet-to-helmet hit on Dobbs on the play before the interception in the 4th quarter not targeting? No, Dobbs wasn't defenseless. And, no, the defender didn't launch. But targeting doesn't necessarily require either of those things to happen. If the defender lowers his head and leads with the crown of his helmet, and makes helmet-to-helmet contact, that's targeting, according to the rule as I read it. Don't get me wrong, I generally hate targeting penalties, but the sauce that's good for the goose is good for the gander. Players have been penalized for far less serious hits than that. It was a hard hit, and I believe it played a role in Dobbs seriously under throwing an open receiver on the next play for an INT. Title: Re: Two things Post by: Black Diamond Vol on October 02, 2016, 05:23:34 EDT Apparently I don't know football rules as well as I thought I did. 1.) Why was the Dobbs touchdown just before the half so controversial? The referee announced that the play "stands" after replay, as opposed to "confirmed," which meant that there wasn't definitive evidence that Dobbs scored, but they couldn't overturn it. UGA fans insist that Dobbs didn't score. I've always been taught that the goal line extends to infinity. Dobbs may have been five yards out of bounds but he never TOUCHED out of bounds until he was obviously past the pylon. Even the poor video angle makes that very evident. 2.) How was the helmet-to-helmet hit on Dobbs on the play before the interception in the 4th quarter not targeting? No, Dobbs wasn't defenseless. And, no, the defender didn't launch. But targeting doesn't necessarily require either of those things to happen. If the defender lowers his head and leads with the crown of his helmet, and makes helmet-to-helmet contact, that's targeting, according to the rule as I read it. Don't get me wrong, I generally hate targeting penalties, but the sauce that's good for the goose is good for the gander. Players have been penalized for far less serious hits than that. It was a hard hit, and I believe it played a role in Dobbs seriously under throwing an open receiver on the next play for an INT. We were wondering the same thing on the targeting play. And as soon as Dobbs threw that next pick, my friend said "he's probably concussed". I hope Butch sends the tape of that play to Birmingham. Not that it will do any good. :frown: Title: Re: Two things Post by: PirateVOL on October 02, 2016, 05:27:45 EDT Apparently I don't know football rules as well as I thought I did. Re 1: Absolutely the correct call. The puppies fans were ignorant.1.) Why was the Dobbs touchdown just before the half so controversial? The referee announced that the play "stands" after replay, as opposed to "confirmed," which meant that there wasn't definitive evidence that Dobbs scored, but they couldn't overturn it. UGA fans insist that Dobbs didn't score. I've always been taught that the goal line extends to infinity. Dobbs may have been five yards out of bounds but he never TOUCHED out of bounds until he was obviously past the pylon. Even the poor video angle makes that very evident. 2.) How was the helmet-to-helmet hit on Dobbs on the play before the interception in the 4th quarter not targeting? No, Dobbs wasn't defenseless. And, no, the defender didn't launch. But targeting doesn't necessarily require either of those things to happen. If the defender lowers his head and leads with the crown of his helmet, and makes helmet-to-helmet contact, that's targeting, according to the rule as I read it. Don't get me wrong, I generally hate targeting penalties, but the sauce that's good for the goose is good for the gander. Players have been penalized for far less serious hits than that. It was a hard hit, and I believe it played a role in Dobbs seriously under throwing an open receiver on the next play for an INT. I didn't see the targeting Title: Re: Two things Post by: Black Diamond Vol on October 02, 2016, 05:30:30 EDT Re 1: Absolutely the correct call. The puppies fans were ignorant. I didn't see the targeting You'll see it on TV. It's very obvious. :frown: Title: Re: Two things Post by: BanditVol on October 02, 2016, 05:33:02 EDT 1. I have always seen it described as the BALL has to be inside the line (or on the correct side of the pylon). If you have the video of Dobbs wonderful tip toe against NW, check the commentary there. It's the ball, not the person, and it doesn't extend to infinity.
2. We can only assume the refs didn't see it. I have noticed other non-calls. If they are going to have this rule, then they need to pay attention and enforce it better. Title: Re: Two things Post by: Creek Walker on October 02, 2016, 05:36:59 EDT Even if the officials didn't notice the targeting in live action, targeting is one of the rare penalties that can be reviewed -- even if it isn't called on the field. There's no way the replay booth missed that.
Of course, there's also no way the replay booth missed our WR fielding a pass like a shortstop fielding a ground ball...but they did. :laugh: Title: Re: Two things Post by: BanditVol on October 02, 2016, 05:38:09 EDT Even if the officials didn't notice the targeting in live action, targeting is one of the rare penalties that can be reviewed -- even if it isn't called on the field. There's no way the replay booth missed that. Of course, there's also no way the replay booth missed our WR fielding a pass like a shortstop fielding a ground ball...but they did. :laugh: Yeah we stole one there. Good on us, we have been on the other end of that too many times to count. :naughty: Title: Re: Two things Post by: VinnieVOL on October 02, 2016, 05:40:27 EDT Also they missed a clothesline tackle on AK, didn't think you could do that either.
I thought the goal line extended to infinity also. |