TNF: Bears @ Packers

[Kiwibrown]

1 minute ago, JBURGE25 said:

There are so many things I could say to that that would result in me being banned. How can you possibly think that. THe guy targeted his head and launched the crown of his helmet into him. He wasnt even going down.

He is a moron if he thinks that is a fair, hit irragadless of law. 

[CWood21]

Just now, Ragnarok said:

No.  I despise that college targeting rule.  Review it after the game and decide.

So because CFB refs use the rule too loosely, it's a bad rule?  For a league that has been sued for a multi-billion (I believe) dollar lawsuit, player safety has to come first.

[Carmen Cygni]

First time offender or not, that hit should deem an immediate expulsion from the game and a suspension. I know the game is fast, very fast, but you must be more aware than that to put colleagues in a career threatening position. He also put himself in danger by lowering his helmet like that. That was a disgusting play by Trevathian.

[Ragnarok]

Just now, Ragnarok said:

Cause he is an incessant competitor.

No.  I despise that college targeting rule.  Review it after the game and decide.  

Just to clarify.  Not saying he doesn't deserve a suspension.  Possibly a lengthy one for that hit.

But I think the college rule goes too far the other direction.  

[JiffyJag]

Just now, Kiwibrown said:

irragadless

oh boy

[incognito_man]

Just now, dante9876 said:

Thats not a penalty. You can call it all kinds of things. But by rule whistle wasnt blown to stop play. Ref threw the flag cause of end result. 

Quote

 

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8 (Unnecessary roughness) in the NFL rulebook

(f) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily. 

 

 

[Kiwibrown]

1 minute ago, jrry32 said:

Yes, He led with the crown of his helmet at full speed into a stopped runner's helmet.

Who was also imobilised, all that could recoil was his neck. 

[incognito_man]

People saying that wasn't a penalty don't know the rule book.

Full stop.

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, CWood21 said:

So because CFB refs use the rule too loosely, it's a bad rule?  For a league that has been sued for a multi-billion (I believe) dollar lawsuit, player safety has to come first.

Real easy

Allow the ref to determine malicious intent.

It's dumb in college because guys get tossed on incidental contact.

[Pats#1]

3 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Dude...come on.  That's probably the easiest flag I've seen in a long time.  Dude is stood up, going backwards, and you do that?  

That makes a Burfict's suspension hit look like a sweet caress. 

In full speed it didn't look like he completely stopped momentum...but on replay it was definitely a second late.

 

The biggest confusing from me was the refs wording of "hitting runner in helmet".

[GSUeagles14]

2 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said:

what was the penalty? 

Would like an answer on this cwood. absolutely a dirty play, but what was the penalty?

[jrry32]

1 minute ago, riceman80 said:

That was more than worth of an ejection tho. I support targeting as well but the ejection being determined by the malice, intent, and recklessness of said hit

It was worth an ejection, but one play doesn't necessitate a rule change. And asking the refs to make even more subjective determinations is asking for trouble.

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

So...it's okay to let players lead with the crown of their helmets at another players head?  Glad to know that overall player safety is less important than watching some player get ejected for putting a players health at risk.  Good to know where your priorities are.

He got a personal foul. He should get suspended by Goodell for it. That's good enough for me. Ejecting players for targeting hasn't made a lick of difference in college other than influencing games on subjective calls. I'm not really interested in having you cry me a river about player safety. If you don't like it, don't watch football.

[CWood21]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

Real easy

Allow the ref to determine malicious intent.

It's dumb in college because guys get tossed on incidental contact.

So the implementation of the rule is the issue?  

[CWood21]

Just now, GSUeagles14 said:

Would like an answer on this cwood. absolutely a dirty play, but what was the penalty?

Unneccessary roughness was the penalty.

[Kiwibrown]

1 minute ago, Jaguarfan said:

oh boy

irregardless, typo, get over it. a man nearly lost his life, may have a terrible injury that ends his career.