***OFFICIAL MINNESOTA AT ILLINOIS IN-GAME THREAD!!!!***

Donate To GopherHole
Iceland12 said:
Honestly, it looked like he was aiming to hit Turner(?) in the chest. Then Turner lowered his helmet and that's where the blow was struck. Slow motion gives the impression that McGhee had a chance to avoid the contact. He didn't and this is coming from a guy who thought that most of the previous targeting calls against the Gophers have been correct.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. He shouldn't have been aiming anywhere with his head to begin with.
 

I hope that delay didn't cool of our passing game...
 

50PoundHead said:
I don't see how anyone can defend McGee here. Would rather make the highlight reel than play football.
Click to expand...

He crouched down quickly to tackle a guy plowing into him. Nothing even remotely "highlight reel" about it.
 


bottlebass said:
please try to explain how that hit was duke's fault? the receiver lowered his head into his. there was literally nothing he could do
Click to expand...

It was not his fault. It was football. Fortunately, B1G officials enforce this rule. In SEC (see last week's Bama game) it is not. Don't blame Duke whatsoever on that play. I think, IMO, it is a completely different situation from last game where Lynn appeared to be headhunting to send a message.
Again, just my opinion.
 


Leidner hit helmet to helmet is never targeting. Why this?

Sent from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
It doesn't matter. He shouldn't have been aiming anywhere with his head to begin with.
Click to expand...

His hands were in front of his head


Correct call. Stupid rule to eject. Should be 15 with no ejection
 

Gopher028 said:
That was facemask to facemask, the crown (targeting) starts above the facemask....
Click to expand...

The hit was above the facemask.

That wasn't even a questionable call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Some Day...Is Coming! said:
Wow! Just wow! You are clueless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

you must be watching a different game. I'll forgive you. Agree with philly, they need to change the rule for an "incidental" targeting so the player gets the 15 yards but stays in the game.
 



Some Day...Is Coming! said:
Not use his head to hit the receiver in the head, pretty simple really. Gotta lower your target area. Gotta use your shoulder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The ball carrier lowered his head. I'm not positive, but I think hitting with your shoulder to the ball carriers head and neck area can still be targeting.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
It doesn't matter. He shouldn't have been aiming anywhere with his head to begin with.
Click to expand...

He wasn't. He was leading with his shoulder, the helmet only came into play because Turner lowered his helmet into the defender. Something that people have been pointing out since the targeting call came into play.
 


Would love to see the stats on targeting ejections this year. If we're not in the top 5 I'd be shocked.

We can piss and moan about the rule all we want - I think it's way too black and white, personally - but if we're getting called for it damn near every week and other teams aren't, it seems they figured out how to coach players not to commit the penalty and we haven't.
 



theTurning said:
He crouched down quickly to tackle a guy plowing into him. Nothing even remotely "highlight reel" about it.
Click to expand...

These guys all go high now and that's a function of the whole highlight reel mentality. It's the ghost of Jack Tatum.
 

50PoundHead said:
These guys all go high now and that's a function of the whole highlight reel mentality. It's the ghost of Jack Tatum.
Click to expand...

i would disagree. far easier to hit someone high and throw them off balance than go down low and take a knee to the head
 



50PoundHead said:
These guys all go high now and that's a function of the whole highlight reel mentality. It's the ghost of Jack Tatum.
Click to expand...

Maybe more so, the demand to get turnovers. They happen more often when you hit waist-up.
 

Gopher07 said:
Would love to see the stats on targeting ejections this year. If we're not in the top 5 I'd be shocked.

We can piss and moan about the rule all we want - I think it's way too black and white, personally - but if we're getting called for it damn near every week and other teams aren't, it seems they figured out how to coach players not to commit the penalty and we haven't.
Click to expand...

What you are forgetting is that most will attribute that to the fact that officials are out to get us and always lean in favor of our opponent when it comes to penalties.

But yeah, I agree, we seem to have a consistent problem with these plays which can be pointed at coaching and getting the guys to tackle the correct way.
 

It's fine. Some people would rather guys get carted off with brain injuries. Because footbawl. I get it.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
It doesn't matter. He shouldn't have been aiming anywhere with his head to begin with.
Click to expand...


Agree that's how the rule is interpreted and applied.

I just don't see how a defender makes a tackle in that situation.

Anyone put in that situation is going to brace himself for the blow, which is going to involve dropping down, and the nature of the play is such that the defender doesn't have enough time to drop past the head/shoulders to the waist.

Either the defender stands up and tries to necktie the guy - which means he takes the force of the blow - or he pulls up and doesn't even attempt to make a tackle.

This is going to "teach" defenders to aim low - and then they'll throw flags for trying to take guys knees out.
 

Mitch has the wind at his back now which should help his noodle arm .
 







Nice! This time THEY were over aggressive!
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom