MN vs “B1G powers that be” game thread…

Donate To GopherHole
MaxyJR1 said:
Don't recall the last time I worked a youth game. The result has everyone thinking it was egregious. IMO it was 50/50. The officials could have been wrong and maybe it's upheld if called on the field.

If everyone in the world thinks it's targeting, it should probably be targeting. Football needs to continue to update the rule to make the game safer.
Click to expand...

Here is the exact wording from my NCAA rulebook. I’d say every element of Note 1 applies, and he was clearly not able to protect himself as he was just completing the catch. Crucially, when in doubt it is a foul. This crew should be disciplined, at minimum. Particularly the booth official.


Targeting and Making Forcible Contact
With the Crown of the Helmet
ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I)
Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head
or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)
Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:
• Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
• Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet
Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):
• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to
receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier..
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose
forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession
 

tbrew85 said:
We could argue the nuances all day long but I think even most Buckeye fans were very surprised that call wasn't made. It should have been. I don't, however, think that there is some grand scheme for or against any particular team during a game.

And I agree, I was mistaken about the face mask. I was conflating this with the play that was initially called targeting and was then overturned.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's any grand scheme either. BUT, I do believe there's a psychological play here where refs feel the need to be EXTREMELY careful and second-guess themselves when calling fouls against the likes of OSU, Michigan, Alabama, etc. Especially when they're playing against the non-blue bloods like the Minnesotas of the world. We've experienced this song and dance way too many times (*cough* *cough* like the Mitch Leidner INT TD that was originally called targeting but overturned even when replays clearly showed the defender lunged with his crown right into Leidner's chin).

Refs are human and make mistakes, but when their mistakes are swept under the rug and ignored, they'll keep happening.
 
Last edited:


tbrew85 said:
Buckeye fan here.

I joined to wish Ibrahim well and did so on another post. He is an impressive player and we want you at your best for the rematch in Indy. ;)

I agree that our player, as the rules currently stand, should have been called for targeting. His helmet did in fact hit the receivers helmet. I don't see how you dont make that call on review.

With that said, all this "it's Because it's OSU" is pretty ridiculous. We have seen many, many similar calls go against us. See the Clemson game we lost in the playoffs 2 years ago. Even in this game, I saw many uncalled holds against the gophers on some of your best plays, so it really does go both ways.

This rule needs changed. Many of these plays deserve a penalty but not an ejection. Basketball has flagrant 1 and 2. This could easily be done for this call in college football.

Good luck to the Gophers the rest of the way.
Click to expand...
This. While I don't think it is on purpose necessarily, I have no doubt that the ejection part is what is in the back of the mind of the officials sometimes. Something like this should have been a penalty and then the only discussion would have been if it was bad enough to warrant an ejection.
 

The screenshot shown earlier clearly shows the defender launching himself (look at his torso angle relative to the ground), tucking his arms tight to his body to use his body as a projectile, and was leading with his helmet to a defenseless receiver. It literally checks every box. Maybe not as egregious as the Leidner hit, but good grief, this isn't even close.

Especially in college football, this play makes zero sense. MBS was making a diving catch. Once he hits the ground, he's down. It's not like the NFL where he can get up and run. So there is literally no need to even touch him, much less "light him up".
 


Unfortunately the officials don't have four weeks of camp to prepare for the season. It's the first real action outside of a spring game. As other's have said officials are human. I think instant replay has to get much better at what they do.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Here is the NCAA telling us how the exact same hit in another game is targeting....


W


T



F
Click to expand...
There is a fourth part to the test for targeting that this announcer neglected to explain. The referee must confirm that there are no buckeyes on the alleged offender’s helmet. If no buckeyes = targeting. If buckeyes, the CFP contender exception kicks in.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Unfortunately the officials don't have four weeks of camp to prepare for the season. It's the first real action outside of a spring game. As other's have said officials are human. I think instant replay has to get much better at what they do.
Click to expand...
We've all had a year off from watching football and it was clear targeting to us. It should be clear targeting to someone that has done all the extensive training and had the experience of a Big Ten official. No excuses. The league should suspend these refs and issue an apology.

When Buckeye fans are signing up on our board just to tell us we got screwed by the refs, you know it's bad.
 

Marooned said:
I don't think there's any grand scheme either. BUT, I do believe there's a psychological play here where refs feel the need to be EXTREMELY careful and second-guess themselves when calling fouls against the likes of OSU, Michigan, Alabama, etc. Especially when they're playing against the non-blue bloods like the Minnesotas of the world. We've experienced this song and dance way too many times (*cough* *cough* like the Mitch Leidner INT TD that was originally called targeting but overturned even when replays clearly showed the defender lunged with his crown right into Leidner's chin).

Refs are human and make mistakes, but when their mistakes are swept under the rug and ignored, they'll keep happening.
Click to expand...
The Big Ten needs to have 3 guys at the BT headquarters that sit and monitor every BT game. All targeting reviews go to them. It's the same 3 guys. Because the consistency on this in the BT is toddler level. Absolutely cruel and comical at the same time.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
The officials have decided to make targeting a point of de-emphasis…for Ohio State.

Given the state of our defense last night, Ohio State‘s dominance in offensive skill players, and the loss of Mo we “probably” weren’t going to win the game but it may have been close and certainly more interesting.

While many fans are reluctant to call out the league for poor officiating considering it “whining”, bad calls and non-calls not only effect the outcome of games but cheat players and fans, and undermine confidence in the league and fair competition.

This looked like bias, favoritism, and perhaps a bit of gambling interest taking precedent over enforcing rules. I’d like the league to take action against this crew but we know they value appearances over doing what’s right. They know the furor of the “whiners” will abate and the game will carry on, less a few fans. The NFL, for example, it still around and it’s officiating is clearly even more compromised. What are football addicts going to do, read books or take up woodworking?
Click to expand...
I was reading a book while watching the game 🥸
 

I appreciate that a few OSU fans acknowledge that this could have been a targeting call. I’m am angry with the officials not OSU. Here is something I will guarantee: if Gopher safety Tyler Nubin had caught Chris Olave unaware seconds after a completed pass (I realize this is improbable in two respects) and drilled him high up, helmet to helmet, knocking him unconscious and probably inflicting a concussion, targeting would have been called on the spot and upheld on review. There are many kinds of privilege in the world. OSU doesn’t ask for the privilege—in the form of non-calls on egregious, meaningful penalties—it enjoys against lesser B1G teams, but it is there. We can speculate as to the reasons why B1G referees give OSU an intra-conference boost, but it is there. The privilege generally undoes the effect of painfully obvious penalties that might have a game altering effect favoring OSU’s opponent. We’ve seen it before.
 
Last edited:


Gophergrandpa said:
I appreciate that a few OSU fans acknowledge that this could have been a targeting call. I’m am angry with the officials not OSU. Here is something I will guarantee: if Gopher safety Tyler Nubin had caught Chris Olave unaware seconds after a completed pass (I realize this is improbable in two respects) and drilled him high up, helmet to helmet, knocking him unconscious and probably inflicting a concussion, targeting would have been called on the spot and upheld on review. There are many kinds of privilege in the world. OSU doesn’t ask for the privilege—in the form of non-calls on egregious meaningful penalties—it enjoys against lesser B1G teams, but it is there. We can speculate as to the reasons why B1G referees give OSU an intra-conference boost, but it there. We’ve seen it before.
Click to expand...

In 2021, I don’t think there is a better way to explain this concept!
 



In Ransom's post game presser the first question was about the hit and he said he didn't think he went high. The best comment on the video in response to him saying he didn't go high is -- "Damn, boy must’ve concussed himself at the same time lmao"
 

Some Day...Maybe said:
The Big Ten needs to have 3 guys at the BT headquarters that sit and monitor every BT game. All targeting reviews go to them. It's the same 3 guys. Because the consistency on this in the BT is toddler level. Absolutely cruel and comical at the same time.
Click to expand...
Big Ten's first goal, trumping all others, is to get it's most talented team into the post-season CFP. Money and reputation. I believe that is why if a game with a non-CFP-contender is too close for comfort late in the game, referees might make a chicken shit call against the non-contender (Dunlap's holding call far away from the play, reversing a big gain for Mo) while ignoring an horrendous targeting penalty committed by OSU that resulted in a drive-ending turnover against the non-contender. Both the call and the non-call favored OSU in critical, drive-ending fashion. As talented as OSU's team is, it still seems to get a boost from the referees near game's end (1) to ensure a victory over a non-contender by a respectable margin (rather than a nail-biter) and (2) to make sure that there are no key roster deletions for OSU going into a game the following week against a ranked opponent. I call this OSU Privilege. It is real ...
 

What bothers me besides not calling targeting is the fact that PJ can’t comment on the missed call because of the threat of a fine. And no where are the officials questioned on what they saw or didn’t see. The stock answer from the B1G office is every play is reviewed. Buy whom? The head official Should have to answer questions just like the head coach. The stock response is if the officials had to justify their calls, we wouldn’t be able to hire officials. My answer is B.S.
 

In a critical play late in the PSU-Wisc game today, one of PSU’s best defenders hit Mertz high when Mertz was running on 3rd down. The hit stopped Mertz 2-3 yards short, forcing a 4thh down. No flag was thrown. But someone somewhere decided the play should be reviewed, and after the review the correct call was made by the rule - targeting (with ejection). Very, very unlike the second half of the MN-OSU game, the entire game was well-reffed and resulted in an exciting, proper finish.

What chaps my ass is how biased B1G can be toward the top programs. Does anyone here believe for a second that had PSU hit Morgan in the exact same situation that they’d have even reviewed it, much less lay a flag and ejection after the review? Of course not. And that’s why we absolutely should be pissed off at the double standards that have existed for way, way too long
 

Big Ten reffing crew just called targeting on Miami against Bama, proving they are happy to call targeting, but only when it’s committed against Alabama, and anyone but Ohio State committing the foul.
 

If Ohio State was playing a MAC team, rather than Oregon, next weekend, I think they allow the refs to call targeting.

That's my story
 

WindyCityGopher said:
Big Ten reffing crew just called targeting on Miami against Bama, proving they are happy to call targeting, but only when it’s committed against Alabama, and anyone but Ohio State committing the foul.
Click to expand...
Alabama tends to get away with uncalled targeting plenty too. Funny how this all works.
 

The PSU LB that got called for targeting today against Wisky was so less egregious than the Ransom hit on MBS, and it wasn’t even close. The conference needs to figure out how to consistently call it. Or just admit they will bow down to OSU in all instances in the name of CFP.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Unfortunately the officials don't have four weeks of camp to prepare for the season. It's the first real action outside of a spring game. As other's have said officials are human. I think instant replay has to get much better at what they do.
Click to expand...
Lol what? There’s a replay guy in a booth who can slow shit down frame by frame.
 

cncmin said:
But someone somewhere decided the play should be reviewed….
Click to expand...
Wisconsin called a TO, and spent the time whining to the refs about how it should be reviewed.

wisconsin fans on Reddit were pissed they didn’t get their TO back.
 

Ewert86PC said:
Click to expand...
One of those calls the Ref made must be to Big Ten Office. "Do not concuss tOSU's chances of making the playoffs." A Ransom has been absolved of any fault. Let's play money ball Big Ten!
 



Word said:
We've all had a year off from watching football and it was clear targeting to us. It should be clear targeting to someone that has done all the extensive training and had the experience of a Big Ten official. No excuses. The league should suspend these refs and issue an apology.

When Buckeye fans are signing up on our board just to tell us we got screwed by the refs, you know it's bad.
Click to expand...
What extensive training? Training includes computer tests and watching film. Outside of games, where is the on the field targeting practice? These officials have day jobs during the week. If anyone should be suspended or questioned, it's the Replay officials.

Interesting that the Big Ten crew working the Louisville/Ole Miss game, missed 4 targeting calls and the replay official made them all targeting.
 

Wow guys the game is over. Bad call. It happens at every level. It sucks. Move on. Quit being whiny little bitches and start working on your defense. Speed kills which was the difference in the game not one call.
 

Laker said:
Wow guys the game is over. Bad call. It happens at every level. It sucks. Move on. Quit being whiny little bitches and start working on your defense. Speed kills which was the difference in the game not one call.
Click to expand...

It was an extremely bad call at a time that basically eliminated the Gophers from any chance at a victory. Not to mention that it was a dangerous play.....and they still got it wrong after a review.

There's nothing wrong with discussing it.
 

Laker said:
Wow guys the game is over. Bad call. It happens at every level. It sucks. Move on. Quit being whiny little bitches and start working on your defense. Speed kills which was the difference in the game not one call.
Click to expand...

You can always tell a troll, but you can’t tell them much
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom