cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 It didnt matter if he got hit in the head, for it to have been a legitimate penalty the Stanford player would have had to lead with his helmet. At full speed it was an easy call, but as soon as the ND qb was rolling on the ground the flag came. When that call was made it seemed clear the refs were going to job Stanford. He was leading with his helmet, that's why he got the flag. He just happened not to make contact with his helmet, which is nearly impossible to tell live at full speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I can't believe someone is saying posters are losers for whining about the refs in a game that happened less than 24 hours ago, but then complaining about a play from 2005 on a call that is never flagged as a penalty. I guess those weren't trained refs in 2005 then that know better than random message board posters? I'm not complaining about the play. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of everybody who wants to complain about the refs only when they benefit ND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) He was leading with his helmet, that's why he got the flag. He just happened not to make contact with his helmet, which is nearly impossible to tell live at full speed. No he led with his shoulder. And you still havent explained the Bush replay complaint. NCAA didnt even start using replay until 2006 and you cant use replay to call a penalty. (Maybe to many men on the field) ND got a gift, not sure why you cant accept that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 You cant call a penalty on replay, if they even had replay in 2005. Do you even understand the rules? Yes, I know that play isn't reviewable, I'm just pointing out how the 2005 call was 100% obvious where the 2012 is not, even when you slow it down to super slow motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 05:32 PM) I'm not complaining about the play. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of everybody who wants to complain about the refs only when they benefit ND. Well, I still say ND got a gift TD against Purdue when Golson fumbled into the end zone. However, I thought the lack of a delay of game call against them on the final drive against Purdue was a bad call, but I admit ND got screwed on the fake fg vs Michigan St. a few years back when that should have been a delay of game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 No he led with his shoulder. And you still havent explained the Bush replay complaint. NCAA didnt even start using replay until 2006 and you cant use replay to call a penalty. (Maybe to many men on the field) ND got a gift, not sure why you cant accept that. I just watched the replay five times, he went in with his head down. His head barely missed Golson's by inches. From a lot of angles, it's going to look like a head to head hit. How many games have you seen from the sideline, or do you just pass judgment on TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 How many NCAA games have i reffed, 0. Not sure how that is relevant. I can read rules and interpret them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 How many NCAA games have i reffed, 0. Not sure how that is relevant. I can read rules and interpret them. Perspective from field level is very different from high up in the stands or on camera. Guy was leading with his head and that's going to get flagged nearly every time. The ref doesn't get the benefit of being 100 feet up in the air to see whether or not it's the head or shoulders that make the contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Im wondering if you have ever played football before. Because the way you are taught to tackle is to put your helmet through the persons chest. Leading with your helmet is not a per se penalty, which is why it was so clear there was no penalty. In that situation they would have had to have deemed that either 1) helmet to helmet or 2) he used his helmet as a weapon. Neither happened, terrible call. The end of the game was far worse though, with the benefit of replay no excuse for that call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 05:44 PM) Perspective from field level is very different from high up in the stands or on camera. Guy was leading with his head and that's going to get flagged nearly every time. The ref doesn't get the benefit of being 100 feet up in the air to see whether or not it's the head or shoulders that make the contact. So aren't you basically saying that maybe it's the wrong call then? No one is saying it wasn't a violent hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 12:44 PM) Perspective from field level is very different from high up in the stands or on camera. Guy was leading with his head and that's going to get flagged nearly every time. The ref doesn't get the benefit of being 100 feet up in the air to see whether or not it's the head or shoulders that make the contact. It really isn't. He was running with the ball. If the player is a ball-carrier, helmet-to-helmet is rarely called because it's hard to avoid it on a moving target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Im wondering if you have ever played football before. Because the way you are taught to tackle is to put your helmet through the persons chest. Leading with your helmet is not a per se penalty, which is why it was so clear there was no penalty. In that situation they would have had to have deemed that either 1) helmet to helmet or 2) he used his helmet as a weapon. Neither happened, terrible call. The end of the game was far worse though, with the benefit of replay no excuse for that call. I was taught to tackle with my feet on the ground and my head up, not flying through the air with my head down. He led with his helmet and he hit the guy in the head. He happened to barely miss a head to head his but that's almost impossible to tell at full speed. I still haven't seen a replay of the last play that 100% determines that neither knee touched the ground before he crossed the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 It really isn't. He was running with the ball. If the player is a ball-carrier, helmet-to-helmet is rarely called because it's hard to avoid it on a moving target. Five years ago maybe, but with all the concussion hype it's called almost every time now. I have two friends that ref HS and small colleges and they've been told to flag liberally and if they miss too many head to head hits they won't continue to work games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 12:52 PM) I was taught to tackle with my feet on the ground and my head up, not flying through the air with my head down. He led with his helmet and he hit the guy in the head. He happened to barely miss a head to head his but that's almost impossible to tell at full speed. I still haven't seen a replay of the last play that 100% determines that neither knee touched the ground before he crossed the line. So you admit you can lead with your helmet, so that cant be a penalty. And flying through the air, also not illegal and barely missing, again not a penalty. The refs messed up, but the last play they got to look at replay, and there is no angle that shows him down. Not 1 angle. Edited October 14, 2012 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 12:54 PM) Five years ago maybe, but with all the concussion hype it's called almost every time now. I have two friends that ref HS and small colleges and they've been told to flag liberally and if they miss too many head to head hits they won't continue to work games. It's not called anywhere close to "almost every time". If that were the case, there would be a flag on virtually every other running play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 So you admit you can lead with your helmet, so that cant be a penalty. And flying through the air, also not illegal and barely missing, again not a penalty. The refs messed up, but the last play they got to look at replay, and there is no angle that shows him down. Not 1 angle. I guess you won't be happy until we get sensors on all the helmets, and the referees will consult handheld computers with a readout on whether or not there was helmet to helmet contact before throwing a flag. And there's no angle that shows him not down, so the ruling on the field stands as called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 It's not called anywhere close to "almost every time". If that were the case, there would be a flag on virtually every other running play. When the tackler leaves his feet and has his head down, that is what gets called. It's something the refs are told to look for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 lol I have no problem with refs missing 50/50 calls, I just find it humorous that you cant admit ND got the benefit. Everyone but you is wrong here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 lol I have no problem with refs missing 50/50 calls, I just find it humorous that you cant admit ND got the benefit. Everyone but you is wrong here. There's a big difference between "ND got the benefit of 50/50 calls" and "Stanford got jobbed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 06:04 PM) There's a big difference between "ND got the benefit of 50/50 calls" and "Stanford got jobbed". 4 straight gigantic calls (50/50, if you want to call it) in the 4th quarter and OT going ND's way = upset fans that feel refs helped out a particular team in a game that was very evenly matched If those 50/50 calls all went against ND, I guarantee you that 99% of the Irish fans would be saying the refs hosed them. Edited October 14, 2012 by fathom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) 4 straight gigantic calls (50/50, if you want to call it) in the 4th quarter and OT going ND's way = upset fans that feel refs helped out a particular team in a game that was very evenly matched. 4 calls? There was the personal foul penalty and the end zone play. Also, upset Stanford fans I could understand. Upset fans who just wanted to see ND lose are whiny hypocrites who deserve to see ND get 20 breaks in a row. Edited October 14, 2012 by HickoryHuskers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Im not even upset. Just dont call people whiners for accurately pointing out that the refs won that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2012 -> 07:08 PM) 4 calls? There was the personal foul penalty and the end zone play. The bogus pass interference call and the 2nd down play that should have been reviewed. Even ND fans, from what I've seen, are acknowledging that Taylor was likely in on that one. You seem to be the only person who is arguing that they didn't get the benefit of the calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Im not even upset. Just dont call people whiners for accurately pointing out that the refs won that game. The refs didn't win the game. Stanford lost the game because they didn't have the balls to try a pass one time in four downs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 The bogus pass interference call and the 2nd down play that should have been reviewed. Even ND fans, from what I've seen, are acknowledging that Taylor was likely in on that one. You seem to be the only person who is arguing that they didn't get the benefit of the calls. Bogus pass interference call? You're really grasping at straws. Better hurry out to your local Target and buy some BYU gear before next Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts