Eric Martin

Okay, somebody watch the Youtube video and tell me that he didn't put his head down and plant the top of it into the facemask/helmet of the OSU player.

This is comical

 
EbylHusker said:
Thanks for posting that video. It's clearly an illegal hit due to the helmet to helmet contact coming from the high nature of the hit.

But it was not intentionally illegal, hence there should be no suspension. It should have been flagged, though.

I'm shocked that so many don't feel this is an illegal hit. Yes, the contact is incidental, but that does NOT matter in this case except to say the hit was not malicious. The hit was up high and the other player wasn't ducking down or doing anything that could put his helmet suddenly into the line of contact. If you make a hit like that and your helmet slams into the other guy's, it is an ILLEGAL hit.

WTH is wrong with you people?
Click to expand...
/facepalm

 
Last edited by a moderator:
EbylHusker said:
And you're still ignoring that they call these hits all the time in college football. Whatever, I'm done. Have fun with your lackey fanboys, lol.
Click to expand...
No, they do not call "these hits" all the time. Again, repeating yourself like a broken record doesn't make your point true, it just means you're repeating yourself.

When they throw flags on hits it's flagrant (hence the use of the word in the rule, BTW). I've seen a good dozen of these flags thrown, and each time it's for a hit LEADING with the helmet, on purpose. Rickey Thenarse's hit that banged up LaVonte David was more flag-worthy than Martin's hit.

The only reason we're talking about this is that the announcers got their panties in a twist yesterday. Martin has about half a dozen hits like this every year. This kid got his world rocked, the announcers threw a hissy fit, and suddenly we're throwing Martin under the bus.

You can tell this is true because Martin had a similar crushing hit on the opening kickoff yesterday that the announcers did NOT blow a gasket on, and we're not talking about it today. Go back and look at the film, and ask yourself why we're talking about this hit and not that one.

 
FR-9...I can't believe I'm wasting my time on this...

"Intentional helmet-to-helmet contact is never legal, nor is any other blow

directed toward an opponent’s head. Flagrant offenders shall be disqualified."

The blow was high, high enough it was directed towards the guy's head. Proof? His helmet slammed into the other guy's. That's a really high hit considering the other guy did not duck down or anything. So it's illegal. Not flagrant, though, as I don't believe he intentionally smashed his helmet into him, just misjudged a little.

 
No, as you can see in what I quoted, they EJECT players for flagrant helmet to helmet hits. They only call the ones like Martin's.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its football, hits like Martins happen all the time. ITS THE NATURE OF THE GAME.

 
Best fans in college football, sitting here justifying a flaggable helmet to helmet hit and then claiming it's only being discussed because they have a beef with the announcers. lmao

 
It was a clean hit. Had the guy not gotten hurt no one would even be talking about this. It happened RIGHT in front of a ref who was staring at the play. Know what you're doing on the field if you don't want to get KTFO.

 
EbylHusker said:
FR-9...I can't believe I'm wasting my time on this...

"Intentional helmet-to-helmet contact is never legal, nor is any other blow

directed toward an opponent’s head. Flagrant offenders shall be disqualified."

The blow was high, high enough it was directed towards the guy's head. Proof? His helmet slammed into the other guy's. That's a really high hit considering the other guy did not duck down or anything. So it's illegal. Not flagrant, though, as I don't believe he intentionally smashed his helmet into him, just misjudged a little.
Click to expand...
I can't believe you're wasting your time on this either. It's pretty simple:

1) It was not intentional. Not a foul.

2) Martin's hit was not directed towards the opponent's head. Again, the rule is not in place to eliminate EVERY SINGLE TIME a helmet contacts a helmet. Basic human physiology shows that if you tackle with your shoulders - as you are supposed to - your helmet will contact the other player. If you hit him around his shoulders, you'll contact his helmet with yours. Again, not a foul.

It is not illegal, simply because the contact was incidental. The force of the hit is irrelevant. The injury sustained by the other player is irrelevant. The ONLY THING that is relevant is if it was intentionally directed at the other players HEAD. It was not - it was directed at the other player's shoulders/chest, and the helmet contact was incidental.

 
EbylHusker said:
Best fans in college football, sitting here justifying a flaggable helmet to helmet hit and then claiming it's only being discussed because they have a beef with the announcers. lmao
Click to expand...
So if we don't see it your way, suddenly we're not the best fans in college football? Please.

 
Yeah, incidental contact happens. But it's generally when both players are hunkering down for an impact. Not when one is running along (stupidly unaware, yes, but that's not the point here) and the other levels him. If you do that, as in hit a player that's just running along, you'd best be sure your helmet is not slamming into the other guy's at the same time your shoulder is hitting his chest. They will call that as targeting a player above the shoulders. It doesn't have to be intentional - it's a circumstance where a high hit is made that didn't need to be so high as to initiate contact with the helmet, and they will flag it if they see it.

 
EbylHusker said:
Best fans in college football, sitting here justifying a flaggable helmet to helmet hit and then claiming it's only being discussed because they have a beef with the announcers. lmao
Click to expand...
You're grasping at straws and simply ignoring the rules of the game. There's a reason it wasn't called.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top