I disagree. I feel like the defender just ran through the receiver.

Report problem with this ad

Jan 2, 2025
11:43:12am

HTCougar Contributor

It was definitely a hard hit, but that's not illegal.

Report problem with this ad

HTCougar

Bio page: HTCougar
Joined: Dec 9, 2013
Last login: Jan 4, 2025
Total posts: 755 (6 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

Was the hit in the ASU v. Texas game targeting. My analysis of Rules 9-1-3 and 9-1-4.

PJMort All-American

Jan 2, 11:32am

The one where ASU got the INT? Probably. Same with the one later on with Texas.

foofcoug

Jan 2, 11:39am

The one where ASU got the interception appeared to have launching involved. I would have to go back and look at it thoug

PJMort

Jan 2, 11:43am

Possibly. Or maybe they were 2 close plays - one went the way a lot of folks

foofcoug

Jan 2, 11:45am

True enough.

PJMort

Jan 2, 11:47am

I agree it was targeting. People seem to be confusing crown of the helmet and

rha1211

Jan 2, 11:41am

Isn't the 6 inch radius crown rule only for defensable players (i.e. ball carriers)?

Crazy Joe Davola

Jan 2, 11:42am

It’s for all players, defenseless or defensable. It does require an indicator though.

PJMort

Jan 2, 11:46am

I disagree. I feel like the defender just ran through the receiver.

HTCougar

Jan 2, 11:43am

Head initiated contact to the head.

IGlowInTheDark

Jan 2, 11:44am

Led with helmet to defenseless player (not crown) head/neck. That's targeting.

rha1211

Jan 2, 12:05pm

Nobody cares anymore. Experts and real refs have said it was and should’ve been

IGlowInTheDark

Jan 2, 11:43am

It's targeting. Any other opinion is factually incorrect

RockyBalboa

Jan 2, 11:48am

As the rule is written it's targeting. Happy it wasnt called.

rad dawg

Jan 2, 11:48am

One problem. A bunch of players HAVE adjusted to the rules. Why does the texas

rha1211

Jan 2, 12:07pm

Report problem with this ad

Posting on CougarBoard

In order to post, you will need to either sign up or log in.

Report problem with this ad