Forcible contact to the shoulder pad is legal

Jan 1, 2025
7:11:50pm

Skeptical Optimist Truly Addicted User

You can’t tell from that video if the forcible contract was to the shoulder or to the head or neck. You can only see the defenders back.

You need conclusive video evidence to overturn a call on replay.

Report problem with this ad

Skeptical Optimist

Previous username: workindev
Bio page: Skeptical Optimist
Joined: Aug 2, 2006
Last login: Jan 8, 2025
Total posts: 85,445 (4,534 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

Targeting no-call against Texas: there is an argument that it wasn’t targeting

Skeptical Optimist Truly Addicted User

Jan 1, 6:56pm

There's a better argument. SEC home cooking.

hebercreeper

Jan 1, 6:59pm

Arizona State got plenty of close and questionable calls

Coop

Jan 1, 7:02pm

It wasn’t an SEC officiating crew

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:17pm

Big Ten and SEC are tighter now than a senior prom queen and her dress.

byujacob

Jan 1, 7:29pm

Don’t agree with what you’re saying at all. This is clear contact to the head on a defenseless player which is targeting

yapacoug

Jan 1, 7:00pm

It’s isn’t clear where the forcible contact was made

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:09pm

Yep. In the speeds on this video, the helmet to helmet contact was the first

Crowd Factor

Jan 1, 7:36pm

I don’t think face mask to face mask contact should be targeting

Coop

Jan 1, 7:01pm

"Minimal contact." That's funny.

Spiff

Jan 1, 7:03pm

He posts a video and claims the opposite of what happened

Plato

Jan 1, 7:23pm

Sure looks forcible to me.

bluesloth

Jan 1, 7:06pm

Forcible contact to the shoulder pad is legal

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:11pm

This is a hit to the head:

bluesloth

Jan 1, 7:15pm

Yeah. No shoulder pad there. Helmet to helmet. Defenseless player. Review booth missed the call

TADOW

Jan 1, 7:17pm

That video doesn’t show where the forcible contact was made, you can’t see the front of his

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:21pm

What? That is absolutely forcible contact to the head. Not sure what definition

bluesloth

Jan 1, 7:25pm

The NCAA defines it as “going beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball”

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:35pm

The two angles you showed were absolutely clear that d hit with facemask first

cwilke1

Jan 1, 7:40pm

You need X-ray vision to see through the Texas defenders shoulder to see where contact was first made

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:52pm

You just need to look at the screen of the two different angles shown to easily

cwilke1

Jan 1, 7:54pm

What are you watching or looking at? No way you are able to make your

Crowd Factor

Jan 1, 7:39pm

I definitely don't want that to be targeting.

JuicyJam

Jan 1, 7:07pm

Looks like forcible head to head to contact to me.

TailgateU

Jan 1, 7:08pm

I know this isn’t a factor for targeting, but the fact that the ball was tipped

garyfan

Jan 1, 7:10pm

All I know is I’ve seen a lot less egregious hits be called than that.

The Pope

Jan 1, 7:22pm

It is such a wildly, inconsistently called penalty. As soon as it happened as I said to myself:

TheLoneCougar

Jan 1, 7:24pm

That’s the problem here. Plays like that do get called all the time

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:38pm

Wouldn't have mattered anyway. Their kicker would've missed the FG.

ShinobiCoug

Jan 1, 7:25pm

They would have had 1st down in Texas territory. Possible TD.

garyfan

Jan 1, 7:35pm

It's possible but I suspect they wouldn't have scored in remaining 50 seconds

cwilke1

Jan 1, 7:38pm

Wow, I suppose that since a few downs weren't productive we should just ignore

TailgateU

Jan 1, 10:59pm

that's not what I said. I am arguing in favor that the refs should have called

cwilke1

Jan 1, 11:05pm

There may be credible argument but you're not making it

Remigius

Jan 1, 7:28pm

I’m not arguing that there wasn’t forcible contact to the head or neck area. I’m arguing that there isn’t conclusive

Skeptical Optimist

Jan 1, 7:42pm

Apparently not all of us...

SoCalCoug

Jan 1, 7:47pm

Me reading posts from people who don’t see clear helmet to helmet contact:

bluesloth

Jan 1, 7:52pm

Define forcible contact, or rather tell me the NCAA's definition of it. It doesn't exist. That's why it's subjective.

Radioactive Coug

Jan 1, 10:25pm

The face mask is part of the helmet

cwilke1

Jan 1, 7:32pm

A key part of the rule: “When in question, it is a foul.”

Odysseus

Jan 1, 8:28pm

This is the strongest case against an ambiguous definition of forcible contact.

Radioactive Coug

Jan 1, 10:27pm

Yup. It was targeting. How many here would have been angry if it was called?

Posting on CougarBoard