Sorta. He was attempting to hammer the receiver as hard as he could. He wasn’t looking for the ball at all. But, intent is not part of the rule. I still think it was targeting, clearly hit him in the helmet with the side of his helmet. But it’s over, not worth arguing about.Wasn't a deadball foul, he was attempting to break up the pass. They got rid of the 15-yard penalty regardless if targeting was upheld or not at least one season, if not two seasons ago.
Why wasn't illegal touching called on Harrison? He went out of bounds and was the first to touch the ball after coming back in. Referee's hat was off indicating the player had gone out of bounds.
Well, it was determined not to be targeting and there's nothing anyone can do about it now.Wrong,.
Players are also prohibited from targeting and marking forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. The rulebook says: “When in question, a player is defenseless.” And in this case, there needs to be at least one indicator of targeting.
Doesn't have to be deadball to be unnecessary roughness. In fact late hit and UR are 2 different fouls.Wasn't a deadball foul, he was attempting to break up the pass. They got rid of the 15-yard penalty regardless if targeting was upheld or not at least one season, if not two seasons ago.
Why wasn't illegal touching called on Harrison? He went out of bounds and was the first to touch the ball after coming back in. Referee's hat was off indicating the player had gone out of bounds.
I know, but others are claiming the defender did both.He doesn't have to crouch or launch. He only has to forcibly strike the head and neck area. Without it being slowed way down, and the clip doesn't, it's hard to tell exactly where he was stuck. In the era of targeting, we have seen a shot like this called, and not called. It is almost silly to even argue about it, since it can go either way on every call. I mean, that one by the TCU player on the UM player, how was that not called? lol
Double Reverse Pass - it was the Philly Special. Harbaugh got too cute. That was the 1st drive of the game though, there were still 55 minutes of football to be played. Again, you're completely dismissing TCU's play. TheLol all you want.
When you’re fourth and goal from the two, at that time in the game, you take the points.
Calling a double reverse in that situation is probably the dumbest play call imaginable.
It eliminated points and fired up TCU.
Fair, but I was assuming the poster in question wanted the penalty, even though targeting wasn't called, which was the rule a few years back.Doesn't have to be deadball to be unnecessary roughness. In fact late hit and UR are 2 different fouls.
In an attempt to break up the pass. .Sorta. He was attempting to hammer the receiver as hard as he could.
What does that have to do with anything?He wasn’t looking for the ball at all.
That's fair, I disagree. Didn't think it was live. Didn't think it was after 3 flags flew. And didn't think it was after replay.I still think it was targeting, clearly hit him in the helmet with the side of his helmet. But it’s over, not worth arguing about.
Had targeting been confirmed, that would have obviously wiped out the illegal touching. So I agree that is likely what happened. Was more a response to the poster who asked about unnecessary roughness penalty after they determined it wasn't targeting.As far as the illegal touching. My guess is they forgot about it after the targeting was reversed. The only diffference it would have made at that point was a field goal attempt from five yards farther back.
The B1G or Ohio State? Ever since that flag in the Fiesta Bowl against Miami, it seems the Buckeyes have been on the wrong side of most 50-50 plays/calls.Are we biased? How many call reversals have favored the BIG TEN over their opponent? It SEEMS like every reversal goes against the BIG TEN, but is that real? Do I just not remember saying ‘well they caught a break with that reversal’, or has that really not happened?
As usual you're wrong.actually the video shows he wasn't hit in the neck or head. furthermore the replay crew probably sees more angles than the viewing audience. they made the correct call. anything else is just crying in your beer. the better team won .
aren't you the person that stated concussions are only a result from a blow to the head?As usual you're wrong.