Should a flag have been thrown?

[Electus Unus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXbnf_M84S8&hd=1


The receiver got a hand on the ball? Are you supposed to let him catch it?

[Buckeye80]

Shot to the head should've been the call there.

[TMer25]

Didn't think so when it happened and still don't think so.

[Electus Unus]

Originally posted by Buckeye80
Shot to the head should've been the call there. he led with his shoulder and hit the receiver right under the facemask near the chest

[STANG RED]

At first at full speed I thought it was clearly a penalty. But after seeing it in slow motion, and from other angles, it was bad call. He did not lead with his head, and did not make helmet to helmet contact. I just think it looked a lot more viscious at full speed that what it really ended up being. IMO it was a clean shot, well within the rules of the game, but I can see how the refs would have seen it defferently at full speed at that moment. Just ended up being a bad break for the DB. He made a good clean play, and delivered one helluva good blow. Football is a mighty rough sport.

[Johnny Utah]

Football is a collision sport. No penalty.

[TexMike]

No, "A" flag should not have been thrown, 3 should have been thrown (and 3 were thrown). This is exactly the type of hit we were instructed to pay special attention to. I think I even posted the video here that we were given as a trainng material this year.

The player hit fits the definition of a "defenseless player" given in the rulebook and the hit was above the shoulders (Rule 9-1-3-b) Furthermore, we have been told if we are not sure if the hit was above the shoulders, rule that it was.

[Johnny Utah]

QB should be fined then for making the receiver defenseless. This is getting crazy!!

[turbostud]

The penalty that was called on that play was unecessary roughness.

[TexMike]

And it was.

[Booter11]

unnecessary roughness on that play is a really dumb call, the defender should have every right to lay a solid hit on a player while the play is going on.

[Johnny Utah]

Before you know it we are going to be playing touch/2below.

[TexMike]

If that hit had been at the receiver's midsection, or (and I hate to say this, but....at his legs), there would not have been a flag. Launching high like the DB did is what got the flag folks. Defenders are still allowed to "lay the wood" , they just have to keep it below the shoulders and not late (or early)

[Additup]

Originally posted by Johnny Utah
QB should be fined then for making the receiver defenseless. This is getting crazy!!

Keep penalizing the defense for a QB's mistake...refs have to enforce it though. Coaches make the NCAA rules, I just hate that it's getting like the NFL.

I understand it's a safety issue, but it's CAUSED by the QB.

[TexMike]

That is like blaming the bartender for the guy who leaves the bar and kills a family while driving drunk.

[Electus Unus]

Originally posted by TexMike
That is like blaming the bartender for the guy who leaves the bar and kills a family while driving drunk. Isn't it the bartenders responsibility to not serve a person who is drunk?

[TexMike]

Show me the bartender who can assess a person's blood alcohol level just by looking at him. There have been plenty of court cases on this and unless the person is falling down drunk, the bartender is NOT going to be held responsible

[Electus Unus]

Originally posted by TexMike
Show me the bartender who can assess a person's blood alcohol level just by looking at him. There have been plenty of court cases on this and unless the person is falling down drunk, the bartender is NOT going to be held responsible bartenders are taught to understand certain signs of a inebriation including staggering, slurred speach, and etc.

[TexMike]

They still cannot assess if a person meets the legal threshold or not. And even if they see someone obviously drunk, it is not their job to keep them from driving.

[Prosper23]

Originally posted by Johnny Utah
Football is a collision sport. No penalty.

Right its football. No flag.

[PhiI C]

I wonder why it wasn't reviewed.

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by TexMike
No, "A" flag should not have been thrown, 3 should have been thrown (and 3 were thrown). This is exactly the type of hit we were instructed to pay special attention to. I think I even posted the video here that we were given as a trainng material this year.

The player hit fits the definition of a "defenseless player" given in the rulebook and the hit was above the shoulders (Rule 9-1-3-b) Furthermore, we have been told if we are not sure if the hit was above the shoulders, rule that it was.

Problem is, the hit was NOT above the shoulders. The defender put his shoulder right in the receivers chest. Then the receivers head snapped forward and hit the defenders shoulder pads as he was going down. After reading your post, I went back and looked at the play several times, and paused it right at the hit each time. The end zone view clearly shows the defender hitting the reciever in the chest, NOT above the shoulders. But I do have to say, at full speed I dont think there is any way to see it as it actually happened. By the rule as you described it, and the way it looks at full speed, they almost had to throw the flag. Even if it was the wrong call.

[shamu85]

Originally posted by Electus Unus
Isn't it the bartenders responsibility to not serve a person who is drunk?

If they're drunk already, isnt' it too late to not serve them?

[Keith7]

No a flag shouldn't have been thrown. I would have the same thing as that safety if I saw someone running over the middle in Celina orange.

[turbostud]

Originally posted by Keith7
No a flag shouldn't have been thrown. I would have the same thing as that safety if I saw someone running over the middle in Celina orange.

That has got to be the weakest attempt at taking a shot at Celina ever.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by TexMike
That is like blaming the bartender for the guy who leaves the bar and kills a family while driving drunk.

Actually Tex a bartender can get in trouble for not cutting someone off and then they kill someone

[TexMike]

We are getting away from he point of this while thing, but I'll bite..cite a case when a "bartender got in trouble" for serving

[Keith7]

Originally posted by turbostud
That has got to be the weakest attempt at taking a shot at Celina ever.

Is someone going to cry about it?? waa waa waa :(

[GreenMonster]

The continued wussification of America's favorite game. This is one of those things that both the NCAA and the NFL have made millions of dollars off of over the past 20 years through their own highlight reels glorifying the big hit which has caused headhunting to become commonplace to begin with and now they will continue to reap the monetary rewards of such hits onlynow they will penalize the player and the team.

[turbostud]

Originally posted by Keith7
Is someone going to cry about it?? waa waa waa :(

No simply pointing out that you have lost your touch with your "shtick". Rocket has taken over your role.

[LE Dad]

Originally posted by TexMike
We are getting away from he point of this while thing, but I'll bite..cite a case when a "bartender got in trouble" for serving Bennigans in Texarkana, bartender was fined and restaurant sued for serving and allowing an intoxicated person to drive to her death.

[IrishTex]

Originally posted by TexMike
We are getting away from he point of this while thing, but I'll bite..cite a case when a "bartender got in trouble" for serving

Here ya go...

http://txtrial.com/Riley%20Law%20Firm/Cases/pooleapp.htm

I will also mention this case is used in TABC training as a model case for sellers and servers of alcoholic beverages in Texas.

I was a contractor for the state and did the classes.

[Keith7]

Originally posted by turbostud
No simply pointing out that you have lost your touch with your "shtick". Rocket has taken over your role.

lol, if only it were a shtick!