I’m calling bulldinky.

[Cuseregular]

I’ve read the entire rule and the picture posted up thread speaks for itself. It was ruled on the field as targeting.

Also, a new piece of language added to the Rules Manual in 2018: “When in question, a player is defenseless.”

And it says head neck “area”, the pics floating Around of the hit show just that

 

[Cuseregular]

These rules were established to stop the kind of hits that gets players injured, to stop players from lining up a player who is lost in the chaos that goes on during a football play. He could have just tackled him but instead lined him up for an egregious shot intended to cause injury.

Eggxactly, see my post elsewhere, spot on

 

[bigmike]

If the situation was reversed our guy gets tossed and Clemson keeps the ball, no question in my mind.

Absolutely, and the Wax call does not get made if a Clemson player did what he did. I have no doubt in my mind about that. Having said that, I do not think we lost because of the referee’s, we lost because we did not make plays and they did.

 

[Millhouse]

And it says head neck “area”, the pics floating Around of the hit show just that

I am not mad at the defender but Clemson glorifying it like that is a little gross. Companies and universities need to pay attention to the morons in charge of their social media

 

[PhatOrange]

What do you want the defender to do here?

The stillshot is misleading. The slow motion replay clearly shows the crown hit his jaw first. It’s a replay from the other side. It’s a hit to the head with the crown. By definition it’s a penalty. And I didn’t think it was targeting until watching it several times on replay. I would love to know why they over turned it.

I’m sure Dyno will send in his complaints by golly. Wiz bang that’ll take care of it.

 

[JKinPhilly]

What I really don't understand is you see all the time where a rushing defender tries to get a hand up and knock the ball from the QB, accidentally hits the helmet and it's an automatic flag for a blow to the head. GS takes a crown of the helmet to the jaw/neck and it's a non penalty. The rules are so subjective it's impossible to make sense of them

 

[OburgOrange]

 

[DuxburyO]

What I really don't understand is you see all the time where a rushing defender tries to get a hand up and knock the ball from the QB, accidentally hits the helmet and it's an automatic flag for a blow to the head. GS takes a crown of the helmet to the jaw/neck and it's a non penalty. The rules are so subjective it's impossible to make sense of them

That’s called bulldinky.

 

[JustPherU]

Yeah - Dabo is like K - he teaches his kids to really sell calls. And he gets them and it matters.

I absolutely hate it in all sports, but it is what it is.

Good coaching is what I call it.Use everything you can to your advantage.

 

[OburgOrange]

 

[Cuseregular]

This is what I was waiting for, clear as day.

That’s called the Motha effin “head and neck area” mad3 and millhout and any others unsure of the at least unconscious bias these refs have and how that bias potentially cost the chance of at the very least being in the game.

This bs non call and the phantom pass interference call on an uncatchable ball (not called the same way when reversed later), cost the chance to likely score on that first series which would’ve changed the whole dynamic of the game both on the field, strategically and motivationally both sides, not to mention crowd.

So yes, it Likely cost us a chance to be in that game/cost a chance to win/cost lost the chance of a special season. Period. End of story. Motha effers, GD Carolina mafia, still so effin pissed.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Player has to have some responsibility for knowing where people are. If you're blind sided because you're spinning around in the middle of the field, it's tough to get a flag when you get blown up

If it makes a difference I never saw him spinning to get hit. He was running and had changed direction towards his right before the hit from what I saw. He was hit from his blind side. Never knew that a runner was responsible for giving an opponent a clear more direct target to hit. Isn’t the reason he turned to the right because he saw a more open field? If Shrader had gotten taken down from behind by a horse collar would that rule be interpreted differently because the runner should have been responsible and assumed that someone was going to catch up with him? The Clemson player hit him high when chasing him from his blind side and in the collision the force of the hit to Shrader‘s helmet forced his helmet half over Shrader’s face as his head was twisted and he was falling and fumbling. (Also clearly shown in a later picture on Syracuse.com) With your definition, there is no such thing as targeting or do you reserve a No targeting rule for just specific players for some reason?

 

[OburgOrange]

 

[FireballPhil]

This isn't going to be popular around here, but man, that looks clean to me. Watched it seven or eight times. I dunno if I'd have overturned the call on the field because it's very close, but I'm a lot less angry. The main thing is, when contact is made, Shrader's head keeps going forward while his body goes backwards, then his head snaps back after. So that means that there was not helmet-to-helmet contact initially, Shrader's helmet snapped into Mascoll's.

Sure looks like a form tackle, shoulder into the chest, helmet tucked. Only way it's targeting is if he launched himself or crouched down and extended, but from that angle it doesn't look like it at all.

Agreed. You can clearly see his head continuing in the direction of travel as the Clemson defender hits hit. It is a pretty violent movement. Had a helmet hit first the trajectory of the head movement would have been much different.

 

[blizz]

What do you want the defender to do here?

Escort him to the endzone. Duh!

 

[sufandu]

This isn't a backwards pass. We give up a timeout saying it is. (I think)

The one they missed that should've been reviewed (if it's reviewable) was where Alford made the catch with his toe barely inbounds and they called it incomplete.

 

[richmondcuse03]

The one they missed that should've been reviewed (if it's reviewable) was where Alford made the catch with his toe barely inbounds and they called it incomplete.

they sure quickly replayed the fumble involving Clemson but nothing for us. It’s over and over. Hope Clemson does leave the league. All I ask is for crappy inconsistent reffing for both teams. Clemson was on the refs all game too. It makes a difference.

Also saw the refs laughing and clowning around with Dabo.

 

[sufandu]

The last sentence of your post sure does make it sound like Shrader was a defenseless player…

You're not defenseless when you're a downfield ball carrier. It was a hard hit that Shrader didn't see coming. I wish he had just gone down sooner.

 

[sufandu]

they sure quickly replayed the fumble involving Clemson but nothing for us. It’s over and over. Hope Clemson does leave the league. All I ask is for crappy inconsistent reffing for both teams. Clemson was on the refs all game too. It makes a difference.

Also saw the refs laughing and clowning around with Dabo.

I'm not looking forward to Clemson leaving. If you think the refs are bad in a tier 2 conference, imagine how bad they'll be in a tier 3 conference.

 

[CarolinaCuse]

IMO - it's definitely targeting... simply because the rule is written in a way to prevent exactly what happened to Shrader's neck and head. Was it the crown? No, not necessarily. But it was definitely targeting as applied by the definition and the resulting impact to the player's head and neck area.

 

[Bayside44]

Good coaching is what I call it.Use everything you can to your advantage.

Faking it should not be a way to go through life,,,but it's the game today.

 

[PhatOrange]

You're not defenseless when you're a downfield ball carrier. It was a hard hit that Shrader didn't see coming. I wish he had just gone down sooner.

The rule protects the tackler too. So it doesn’t have to be a defenseless ball carrier. The Notre Dame kid got tossed last night for tackling a guy in the thigh with the crown of his helmet.

 

[SWC75]

Every tackle leads with the helmet.

GS is a big reason he got hit in the head. That's why they didn't call it. I'm fine with them reserving ejections for plays where there was nothing the offensive player could do.

That's what shoulder pads are for. A few years back, when Danny Parkins had a local show, he claimed that Dick Butkus led with his helmet all the time. I looked at three different You-Tube videos of Butkus. They had no repeat plays, (probably from different seasons). They lasted 16 1/2 minutes. I saw him lead with his helmet once - and it was into the other guy's shoulder pad.

 

[SWC75]

I'm just glad Zapruder was there to record it.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

How about Clark’s kick catch interference call?

None of us saw a fair catch signal and we all thought the ball hit the return man before Clark did.

Anyone see a replay of that?

They were stretching the rules, which the refs should not allow. On another punt he called a fair catch the min the ball was kicked. How are the players barely off the LOS going to see that? My guess is he did the same on that play.