weak penalties

Alex 4.0

Alex 4.0

New member
this is a topic that warrants discussion,

We saw a penalty called agaisnt E. Martin in the game for "unnecessary roughness". That is totally weak. if you watched any of the other games (okie state) you saw some similar calls that were totally suspect.

I have to be honest, I was a little put off by these. It almost seems like they are taking away from the physicality of football, and making it a game for nancy's. I'm worried they took the "protecting the players" thing way too far this season....

Thoughts?????

 
Alex 4.0 said:
this is a topic that warrants discussion,

We saw a penalty called agaisnt E. Martin in the game for "unnecessary roughness". That is totally weak. if you watched any of the other games (okie state) you saw some similar calls that were totally suspect.

I have to be honest, I was a little put off by these. It almost seems like they are taking away from the physicality of football, and making it a game for nancy's. I'm worried they took the "protecting the players" thing way too far this season....

Thoughts?????
Click to expand...

Yep I totally agree. Its the new no helmet to helmet rule. They even said that they will have to use the threat of ejections against helmet to helmet collisions because "we can't fine our players." I understand no helmet to helmet more on QB's and whatnot, as they are immobile. But that hit martin had was just a good hit, period. Why does the NCAA think it has to mimic the NFL in every decision? Eventually were gonna be putting green jerseys on the QB's in games. Ridiculous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alex 4.0 said:
this is a topic that warrants discussion,

We saw a penalty called agaisnt E. Martin in the game for "unnecessary roughness". That is totally weak. if you watched any of the other games (okie state) you saw some similar calls that were totally suspect.

I have to be honest, I was a little put off by these. It almost seems like they are taking away from the physicality of football, and making it a game for nancy's. I'm worried they took the "protecting the players" thing way too far this season....

Thoughts?????
Click to expand...
Yeah there were a couple of questionable calls like that this game. But what's funny is, Eric Martin gets flagged for his hit, but there was no flag when Bradford went down. There is going to be no consistency this season with that type of call. It's going to be very subjective throughout the season

 
Alex 4.0 said:
this is a topic that warrants discussion,

We saw a penalty called agaisnt E. Martin in the game for "unnecessary roughness". That is totally weak. if you watched any of the other games (okie state) you saw some similar calls that were totally suspect.

I have to be honest, I was a little put off by these. It almost seems like they are taking away from the physicality of football, and making it a game for nancy's. I'm worried they took the "protecting the players" thing way too far this season....

Thoughts?????
Click to expand...

Could have been a statement by the referees with the first game and all. But too many guys are leading with there helmits or leaving the ground which is super dangerous

 
it's not just the helmet to helmet stuff, though. If you saw the okie state game there were two calls that were pretty dumb. neither instance was helmet to helmet, and they were good plays. Separating the ball and the receiver... making a good tackle on a player.

I am afraid they took it TOO far. As you have said it may have been an opening weekend statement, but I sure as hell hope that eric martin keeps hitting people the way he did on that play, because that is clean and thats what this defense needs... some attitude.

 
Back
Top