Clowney Hit of the Century...

I understand the purpose behind trying to protect the players, but I think that there is a lot of gray area here.

How do they justify an ejection, when it takes so much analysis to determine the nature of each hit, especially when there are hits like that in every game? It's a fine line, and every ref is going to interpret things differently.
 
The Pac-12 refs are sure to interpret this in the worst possible way. I foresee a lot of booing and verbal abuse in the near future.
 
The Pac-12 refs are sure to interpret this in the worst possible way. I foresee a lot of booing and verbal abuse in the near future.
Click to expand...

booing the refs and coaches is OK. They get paid. I never boo the kids though.

 
Yes, but they are finally getting around to enforcing the Curtis Williams (RIP) rule.
Click to expand...

Thou shalt not smash a woman's face in or thou shalt not withhold child support payments?
 
I understand the purpose behind trying to protect the players, but I think that there is a lot of gray area here.

How do they justify an ejection, when it takes so much analysis to determine the nature of each hit, especially when there are hits like that in every game? It's a fine line, and every ref is going to interpret things differently.
Click to expand...

Agree, especially given that a questionable call under this rule has the potential to be a complete game changer. Ejections should be limited to the most egregious penalties such as leading with the crown of the helmet in an intentional helmet to helmet blow. Tossing a player for that is justifiable, but playing the interpretation game on lesser hits that carry an automatic ejection penalty is a problem.
 
Last edited:


Ho Lee FUK you guys are some little bitches!

GURGLE
 
Last edited:
I understand the purpose behind trying to protect the players, but I think that there is a lot of gray area here.

How do they justify an ejection, when it takes so much analysis to determine the nature of each hit, especially when there are hits like that in every game? It's a fine line, and every ref is going to interpret things differently.
Click to expand...

Agree, especially given that a questionable call under this rule has the potential to be a complete game changer. Ejections should be limited to the most egregious penalties such as leading with the crown of the helmet in an intentional helmet to helmet blow. Tossing a player for that is justifiable, but playing the interpretation game on lesser hits that carry an automatic ejection penalty is a problem.
Click to expand...
My problem with this whole thing, is the "if in doubt, he is out". There is going to be a lot of doubt, because of how fast the game is, regardless of how many replay angles they can look at. I would also agree with Derek in saying that the Pac refs will screw this up on a regular basis.
 
Ho Lee FUK you guys are some little bitches!

GURGLE
Click to expand...

He was one of the Quooks on Dawgboard who really dragged the place down. Just wait until that Faber idiot and CougLJ come over.
 
Ho Lee FUK you guys are some little bitches!

GURGLE
Click to expand...

He was one of the Quooks on Dawgboard who really dragged the place down. Just wait until that Faber idiot and CougLJ come over.
Click to expand...

Can't wait for more stupid questions and long winded poasts which could be summarized in 1 sentence.
 
Ho Lee FUK you guys are some little bitches!

GURGLE
Click to expand...

He was one of the Quooks on Dawgboard who really dragged the place down. Just wait until that Faber idiot and CougLJ come over.
Click to expand...

If there aren't any indications of rough waters, they'll be here.
 
Last edited:
I understand the purpose behind trying to protect the players, but I think that there is a lot of gray area here.

How do they justify an ejection, when it takes so much analysis to determine the nature of each hit, especially when there are hits like that in every game? It's a fine line, and every ref is going to interpret things differently.
Click to expand...

Agree, especially given that a questionable call under this rule has the potential to be a complete game changer. Ejections should be limited to the most egregious penalties such as leading with the crown of the helmet in an intentional helmet to helmet blow. Tossing a player for that is justifiable, but playing the interpretation game on lesser hits that carry an automatic ejection penalty is a problem.
Click to expand...
My problem with this whole thing, is the "if in doubt, he is out". There is going to be a lot of doubt, because of how fast the game is, regardless of how many replay angles they can look at. I would also agree with Derek in saying that the Pac refs will screw this up on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

Agree on all counts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top