Epic game - Ga vs GT
Posted: Sat Nov 30, 2024 8:02 am
I couldn’t last as long as the game lasted. Ga outlast GT in 8 overtime’s.
http://www.yosefscabin.com/forum/
I don’t think the rule just applies to “defenseless” players. I believe targeting could have been called on that play.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 11:27 amSo here is my take. On that fumble that allowed Georgia to get the ball back to tie the game, it looked like the safety hit King in the head with the crown of the helmet. I understand that it isn’t a penalty by definition since King wasn’t considered defenseless, but if the rule is about safety, how is that hit deemed more safe?
Completely agree. One of the comments that is always part of the conversation is that the receiver of the hit was a defenseless player.Mjohn1988 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 2:02 pmI don’t think the rule just applies to “defenseless” players. I believe targeting could have been called on that play.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 11:27 amSo here is my take. On that fumble that allowed Georgia to get the ball back to tie the game, it looked like the safety hit King in the head with the crown of the helmet. I understand that it isn’t a penalty by definition since King wasn’t considered defenseless, but if the rule is about safety, how is that hit deemed more safe?
There were a few targeting calls missed last night. On both sides. The guys are almost too fast to the naked eye.Mjohn1988 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 2:02 pmI don’t think the rule just applies to “defenseless” players. I believe targeting could have been called on that play.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 11:27 amSo here is my take. On that fumble that allowed Georgia to get the ball back to tie the game, it looked like the safety hit King in the head with the crown of the helmet. I understand that it isn’t a penalty by definition since King wasn’t considered defenseless, but if the rule is about safety, how is that hit deemed more safe?
I was pulling for GT, not sure why, but I wouldn’t have wanted a targeting call on that fumble to have made such a huge difference in that game.311neers wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 5:17 pmThere were a few targeting calls missed last night. On both sides. The guys are almost too fast to the naked eye.Mjohn1988 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 2:02 pmI don’t think the rule just applies to “defenseless” players. I believe targeting could have been called on that play.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 11:27 amSo here is my take. On that fumble that allowed Georgia to get the ball back to tie the game, it looked like the safety hit King in the head with the crown of the helmet. I understand that it isn’t a penalty by definition since King wasn’t considered defenseless, but if the rule is about safety, how is that hit deemed more safe?
Heck of a hit from that safety. Free runner downhill, I love it. We used to fill holes like that and pop heads.Mjohn1988 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 5:22 pmI was pulling for GT, not sure why, but I wouldn’t have wanted a targeting call on that fumble to have made such a huge difference in that game.311neers wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 5:17 pmThere were a few targeting calls missed last night. On both sides. The guys are almost too fast to the naked eye.Mjohn1988 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 2:02 pmI don’t think the rule just applies to “defenseless” players. I believe targeting could have been called on that play.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 11:27 amSo here is my take. On that fumble that allowed Georgia to get the ball back to tie the game, it looked like the safety hit King in the head with the crown of the helmet. I understand that it isn’t a penalty by definition since King wasn’t considered defenseless, but if the rule is about safety, how is that hit deemed more safe?