http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/topic,8951.15.html

See Farm93's posts.

Go!Bears;842233445 said:

---

How come they can review it to overturn the suspension/ejection (McCain's hit) and they can't review it to impose a suspension?

---

Exactly.

My e-mail to the PAC 12

Quote:

---

Mr. Corrente:



This is seriously the most textbook case of TARGETING I've ever seen since the rule was implemented. Yet the refs missed it. So what is the Pac-12 going to do about it.



Take a look for yourself.







According to a handout produced by College Football Officiating, LLC, if officials see the following things, the risk of a targeting foul is high:

Launching toward an opponent to make contact in the head or neck area. Yup.

A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust with contact at the head or neck area. Yup.

Leading with the helmet, forearm, fist, hand or elbow into the head or neck area. Yup.

Lowering the head before attacking and initiating with the crown of the helmet. Yup.

According to that same handout, the following factors would indicate less risk of a targeting penalty being called:

A heads-up tackle where the crown of the helmet does not strike above the shoulders. Nope.

A wrap-up tackle. Nope.

The head is to the side rather than used to initiate contact. Nope.

Incidental helmet contact due to players changing position during the play. Nope.



It is a SAFETY rule... not a PI or holding. It is a rule in place for SAFETY. Safety of the players.


If the Pac-12 can review a TARGETING hit to overturn the suspension/ejection of a player then certainly you can review the same play to impose a suspension.



Why is Skov not under investigation for TARGETING?



Everyone understands that Pac-12 officials issue favorable calls to the better teams, but this is a matter of instituting rules keeping college athletes safe from head trauma and ultimately mitigating league personal injury liability.



Look at the video. All I see is a defensive player leaving his feet in order to apply a flagrant helmet to helmet TARGETED hit against a defenseless quarterback in the process of throwing the ball.



That no call was made against Skov is perhaps an officiating mistake, but upon review the fact that no penalty will be invoked against such play by the Pac-12 is incompetence and certainly open to review in any future lawsuits against the Pac-12.



There is no place for head hunting hits, ala Skov's leaping helmet to helmet hit on a QB, in the Pac-12.



I'm sure Larry Scott would agree. I'm also sure that Larry Scott is concerned about future liability concerning the head trauma student athletes occur while playing Pac-12 football.



I'd appreciate your response.



[SchadenBear], Esq.

---

^ +1

Nitpick in slo-mo all you want, but at real speed it was just another play. We have a long tradition of winning and playing by the rules. We set the standard. At one point this year, our O-line had only one holding penalty total in 10 consecutive games. The announcer mentioned how many have aeronautical majors - that's an important example.

GlynMilburnTD;842233547 said:

---

Nitpick in slo-mo all you want, but at real speed it was just another play. We have a long tradition of winning and playing by the rules. We set the standard. At one point this year, our O-line had only one holding penalty total in 10 consecutive games. The announcer mentioned how many have aeronautical majors - that's an important example.

---

Pray tell, how is it browsing the internet and typing and participating on message boards while also being blind? I've heard that text-to-speech programs have come a long way. It's just a shame there's no way to decode images yet.

GlynMilburnTD;842233547 said:

---

Nitpick in slo-mo all you want, but at real speed it was just another play. We have a long tradition of winning and playing by the rules. We set the standard. At one point this year, our O-line had only one holding penalty total in 10 consecutive games. The announcer mentioned how many have aeronautical majors - that's an important example.

---

Crawl back into your hole. You don't want to parse words with me.

cal2000;842233536 said:

---

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/topic,8951.15.html

See Farm93's posts.

---

What absolute and complete idiocy. This is arguably some of the most sophomoric reasoning I've ever seen on a football blog (and that's saying something). Goff's body "crumpled into Skov" who was trying to lower his "more massive body" and it only thus "appeared to be targeting"? How ridiculous. I hope Stanford is very proud.

I believe Karma will introduce him to a crack back or leg whip by some of the big boys. Then when he is in the hospital, with his ligaments and tendons in shreds, we can send him that GIF. At least he wont be out driving drunk so he can hurt even more people.

davetdds;842233558 said:

---

I believe Karma will introduce him to a crack back or leg whip by some of the big boys. Then when he is in the hospital, with his ligaments and tendons in shreds, we can send him that GIF. At least he wont be out driving drunk so he can hurt even more people.

---

Worse, I hope he winds up on the Miami Dolphins

chazzed;842233489 said:

---

Who knows? Maybe they want Furd to be at full strength when facing ND?

---

That is a realistic conspiracy theory. Pac12 refs. We would probably cheer if the roles were reversed.

Of course w pac12 refs, Occam's Razor would point to incompetence over conspiracy.

StillNoStanfurdium;842233533 said:

---

I wouldn't mind a belated punishment to have Skov out in the Pac-12 championship game...

---

This is a good point. I will pull for ASU more than usual when they're playing the Furd.

GlynMilburnTD;842233547 said:

---

Nitpick in slo-mo all you want, but at real speed it was just another play. We have a long tradition of winning and playing by the rules. We set the standard. At one point this year, our O-line had only one holding penalty total in 10 consecutive games. The announcer mentioned how many have aeronautical majors - that's an important example.

---

In real speed it was just another play and a penalty for which he should've been ejected. This is true of every play where this happens. Real life doesn't happen in slo-mo.

GlynMilburnTD;842233547 said:

---

Nitpick in slo-mo all you want, but at real speed it was just another play. We have a long tradition of winning and playing by the rules. We set the standard. At one point this year, our O-line had only one holding penalty total in 10 consecutive games. The announcer mentioned how many have aeronautical majors - that's an important example.

---

No. At full speed he launched and went high. Textbook penalty. It is why the rule was made.

It was truly disgusting. Worse is the fact that there have been many cases less obvious and egregious than this that WERE called. Because it IS so obvious here, why won't the league do the RIGHT thing at this point, at least to deter future conduct like that?

Don't tell me well no foul so too late to do anything. Never too late until the next game. Incredible any player got away with that. Travesty farce of a sham stuff.

Stop the crap - do something, league. YOU are victimizing deserving athletes, young men who DESERVE you to be FAIR.

I love the naivete of people who've just started watching a sport. As if the only penalties that need to be called are those where there is a clear intent to injure. The fact of the matter is that if Skov executes a proper form tackle here, there's no controversy. He'd wrap up, his head would be up (see what you hit!), and his feet would be on the ground, driving through the ball-carrier. This is actually the way you're coached to tackle so that you don't miss tackles. The targeting rule is in place to force defenders to be in control of their bodies and the things that they're using to hit opposing players. The closest analogy is hockey. If you're flailing your stick above shoulder-level it doesn't matter if someone else knocks it into another guys head. It's your job to have control of your stick, which never needs to be above waist level, and if you're not paying attention to that then you're posing a risk to other players. The targeting rule isn't in place to stop people from making big hits, it's in place to force people to tackle the way they're supposed to (which is also, conveniently, the safest way) in the first place.