No, I wish I had Anne Hathaway and Natalie Portman together on a deserted island... with room service.
Fire all the ACC officials
- Thread starter imajericho
- Start date
Can we argue about: which is more masculine Mustard or Mayonnaise now?
"Real" football teams wear every color under the sun. Don't go bashing CAROLINA Blue just because the people in charge at Clemson decided to put purple and orange together. I'm sorry you have to look at, and eventually WEAR, that ugly match, but you somehow manage.
Whatever you do, don't bash that blue. Just go outside on a sunny day:
Watson was down. the ref closest to the player that was called off side was the nitwit that threw the flag and he was pulling it as the ball was being kicked. Blown call for sure and no excuse for it in a championship game. I agree with all the posters about "follow the money"
I wonder what the Bear would have done to that punter in his younger days?Yeah... that tirade on the punter looked like a man who would get charged with criminal domestic violence. If that had been a true game-changer, like near the end of the game and it tilted away from the Tigers? I think he might have gone Woody Hayes on the kid.
No, that's incorrect. Targeting is not defined by intent. It's strictly defined by the contact. Clemson was called for it in the South Carolina game last year, even though the contact was incidental.
No, it wasn't to the shoulder first. It was clearly helmet first. It also doesn't matter if the contact was to the shoulder first. Again, Clemson got called for that last year in the South Carolina game.
Also, no North Carolina would not have maintained possession. The foul would have overridden the play. It's just like if a defense intercepts a pass, but was called for targeting on the quarterback. The turnover would not stand, and the offense would maintain possession. Same thing here. Calling targeting on North Carolina would have negated the fumble recovery.
Charliethewanker you are a sore winner which is pathetic Plus off sides doesn't any longer require the flag to be thrown after the snap. Plus funny Carolina "the real one" is on every best uniform list. We are unique you guys might as well be Illinois , BG or any number of teams that wear the hideous orange. Plus for you dumb azzes no ref is going to call targeting when guys are diving to recover a fumble or a free kick. Plus how many holding calls are missed in every game? I saw several on your OL and Wr's . Plus never heard either commentator call for targeting on the Watson hit so jus stop rationalizing. So really go screw your pet goat and you will feel better. That enough pluses for you?
YOU are the only ones who think it was targeting. The only ones. No ref is going to call targeting when guys are diving charging for a fumble or free kick recovery I have never seen it happen and neither have you. Listen I am going to type it slooow for you it was not targeting never was never will be. You would think you lost the game.
no one had possession is why it wasn't targeting is what i was told by a friend who knows the rulebook much better than me.
i'm asking if this is true?
not entirely true one of the main determinations is "defenseless player". The point is you can't call targeting with any accuracy in the charge/scrum for a fumble/free kick recovery. It defies common sense. I do agree that an onside kick is a very dangerous situation and it has been discussed for elimination.
not sorry and it' wasn't. WTF aren't you on your own board discussing a huge upcoming game with OU? Just wondering.Nobody on here claims the victory was stolen from us , just would like to see how Q would have responded to that huge pressure.
Win, lose or draw, I'm sorry - we're still UNC and you're still Clemson. Enjoy a fleeting moment in the college athletics spotlight.
Dude, you're wrong. Not every time someone gets hit in the head is it targeting. The Clemson player ducked into the hit, after the UNC player had already started his tackle. The offside call was clearly incorrect. Did it cost us the game? Who knows. We had an uphill climb even from there but it would have been nice to get the chance to let the kids decide it on the field rather than have it decided by the refs.
If you need to make up phantom calls to try to make yourself feel like the offside call wasn't pivotal, go for it. But please don't post that fiction here, I want to root for Clemson to win the whole damn thing, and people like you that can't accept the truth are really making that tough for me to do right now.
Yes, you can call targeting on a scrum. There is no provision that says you can't call targeting in that situation. Also, it wasn't as scrum. The rule clearly states that a defenseless player is one who is attempting to catch or recover a kick. Brooks was definitely trying to recover the kick. #42 also made contact to the head, initiated contact with the crown of the helmet, and launched himself. The play has all the listed elements of a targeting foul. So yeah, it was targeting.
Because you are wrong.
Ok, if you are going to say ducking your head eliminates targeting, then Clemson shouldn't have been called for the foul on Switzer, because he ducked his head after Green already started his tackle as well.
Aside from that, yes it was clearly targeting. The rule says:
No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.
Check
No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)
Check
The rule also lists several key elements to determine targeting:
Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make contact in the head or neck area
Check
Leading with helmet, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with contact at the head or neck area
Check
Lowering the head before attacking by initiating contact with the crown of the helmet
Check
I'm not making up phantom calls. I agree that the offsides was a blown call. What I'm saying is, if you are going to complain about bad calls, you can't ignore bad calls that help your team. The offsides was blown, but the targeting was also blown. If both had been called correctly, Clemson still would have had the ball. It would also have been pivotal if North Carolina got possession, even though they committed a foul while recovering. You are being dishonest if you complain about one bad call, but ignore another one.
1st thing once it has hit the ground it is no longer a kick and all fair catch protection ends. 2nd targeting was put into the rules to protect ball carriers and defenseless players a guy on the front line is not defenseless. Name one time you have seen targeting during a fumble or onside kick. Still want to know why you aren't on your own board discussing OU?
you putting "check" doesn't make it true. I promise you that you have never seen targeting called on an onsides kick or on a fumble scramble. I'll wait for your response.
No, you are incorrect. The rule clearly said a player trying to recover a kick is deemed defenseless. It has nothing to do with a fair catch.
Defenseless player—a player not in position to defend himself.
Examples (Rule 2-27-14):
- A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
- A receiver attempting to catch a 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.
- 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.
Great point. And articulated better than I could. Once the ball hit the ground the targeting possibility is off the table. Try again TopDeck. If they called every play someone lead with their helmet targeting, there would be a flag on every single play in the game of football
Targeting...LMAO. Let's go back and review any possible missed holds, pass interference and blocks in the back too while we are at it. And not just this one play- lets look at the whole game.
Why do you taters worry that we got jobbed on the offsides call? You won- just shut up and get ready for Oklahoma.
Why do you taters worry that we got jobbed on the offsides call? You won- just shut up and get ready for Oklahoma.
Last edited:
It's like a well rehearsed line coming from the tiger brigade. Why the hell are they even over here? Probably because they KNOW they benefited from a bullshit call.
And to the dude that brought up the basketball game saying you only had 3 guys left in the floor: WRONG! There were 4 at the end of the game but Clemson only dressed 8 players that night due to injury, illness, whatever. Its actually quite an accomplishment that only 4 kids fouled out considering they were playing Rick Barnes GOON ball.
And to the dude that brought up the basketball game saying you only had 3 guys left in the floor: WRONG! There were 4 at the end of the game but Clemson only dressed 8 players that night due to injury, illness, whatever. Its actually quite an accomplishment that only 4 kids fouled out considering they were playing Rick Barnes GOON ball.
Precisely.
If it were me, I'd just be enjoying it.
Look at it this way:
If no flag had ever been thrown, do you really think all the Clemson fans and the rest of the nation would be screaming "Hey! The Tar Heels were offsides on that kick!" ??? Hello no! No one would have even thought to mention it because it never f*cking happened! They'd be pissed that we had a chance to send it to overtime. If we'd won in overtime, that Punter would have transferred to UNCC the next day.
On PTI, they had a segment on UNC getting hosed on that call. Wilbon was adamant about how we got the shaft and even referenced the Twitter buzz about the "fix".
Yep, guilty consciences at work here.
In best S.C. girly voice "Let's try real hard to make the bad call not true."
And reality is it doesn't matter. The horrible call is in the books, the game is in the books, Clemson will forever have the "win" with no asterisk in the records.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Class of 2026 Recruiting Thread (Updated 6-9: Kendre' Harrison info added)
- Latest: ohio tarheels
-
-