Eric Martin

[HuskerJosh]

Yeah there's NO possible way he was happy that his team just returned a kick for a TD. No way. He was clearly mocking the hurt player. What a stupid argument.

[HuskerBCS]

knapplc let me jump in here. First off I think the hit could be interpreted either way, legal or illegal. If the OSU guy has his head on a swivel we aren't having this conversation. Now, my problem with all these helmet to helmet calls lately is the way that the player making the hit is doing it. 99% of these hits are with players making a block or tackle and the player has his head down. Now not only does this make it look like he is targeting the player with the top of his helmet but he is also risking serious injury to himself. Youre taught to keep your head up when you tackle and it seems to me that players are getting very sloppy in this area lately.

 

I guess my question is....do you think that these helmet to helmet calls would be made if the player kept his head up so it didn't appear like he was using his helmet to target the other player? I think they would be. Knapplc....does the fact that Martin has his head down make any difference to you?

 

EbylHusker....feel free to chime in if youre still around. Are you even a Husker fan? Im confused cause you sure dont sound like one.

[HuskerJosh]

My question is...how do you keep yourself safe and deliver a hit without leaning toward another player (with your head necessarily going that way as well)? You lean your head back, you risk serious neck/head injuries to yourself. Your head is connected to your shoulders, they necessarily have to move in the same direction (unless you're Eric Crouch getting your head ripped off). Football is a violent game. Nothing will change that.

[irafreak]

Just like to say that I finally got to watch the play without my lousy antenna flickering and freezing the channel and it did indeed happen before Niles hit midfield...in fact it was about the time he busted through the first wave of defenders. The hit was high to the head but it certainly was within the play.

 

 

[Count 'Bility]

...

 

The rule I posted is THE RULE for flagrant fouls. The NCAA doesn't have separate rules for flagrant fouls for players who are and aren't paying attention, they have ONE RULE. Coincidentally, that's the rule I posted. Had you used google, you would have known that. Here is the rule again, since you can't be bothered to do your own basic research:

 

Flagrant Personal Fouls (Rule 9-6). For 2009-10 the rules committee has added a new section that calls for conferences in the days following a game to review certain particularly dangerous plays. This new rule says that if a player is ejected for any flagrant personal foul the conference must review the game video for possible further action.

In addition

, if the officials call fouls for

targeting defenseless players or

using the crown of the helmet

and the player is not ejected, the rules mandate a conference review. Furthermore, if the review by the conference reveals actions that should have resulted in a personal foul but were not called, the conference may impose sanctions.

 

I put the words "In addition" in bold because, apparently in your straw-grasping, you somehow think that because the rule mentions defenseless players, that's all it covers. This is not the sole intent of this rule - it clearly has two parts:

 

1) targeting defenseless players

 

OR

 

2) using the crown of the helmet

 

Underlined, above. This is not an ambiguous rule. While you may wish to pretend that the rule does not support what I've been telling you, it most certainly does. Continuing to say it doesn't isn't productive, it's pointless. Stop being pointless.

 

...

 

And you can argue whatever you wish to about intent, but he sort of lost the benefit of the doubt with his behavior on the sidelines.

 

Boy, i'm sure glad your psychic powers can tell exactly what the players are talking, laughing, crying about on the sidelines. I've alway wondered that kind of stuff.

[schuhbdoo]

It would've been a shame if that play was erased by a flag on this play. If EM goes a little lower on into the body this thread wouldn't be at 140 posts. It may or may not have been legal but it was right on a fine line. You take away that TD with a penalty and the game may end differently.

 

I just hope going forward he learns that hits like that end up as a highlight but they can also hurt the team if they are flagged.

[Enhance]

There's no point in arguing with knapplc, he'll just delete your posts/thread anyway if he doesn't like it/can't think of a retort.

 

Yes, I clearly don't know how to support the logic of my position, so I've just deleted this whole thread.

 

Obviously not this one, but you have on other ones.

What are you talking about?

 

I have been a member of this board for close to three years now and have never seen ANY moderator (especially one like knapplc, who I respect quite a lot) delete/lock a thread because they weren't winning an argument. We have specific rules for what should/shouldn't be locked in a thread and mods can be banned just as easily as the rest of us for abusing their powers. It's not like the admins/mods all have some secret debate-winning society going on behind closed doors. Quite a few of them just happen to form good opinions.

 

I have read both sides of the discussion, and I think those of you who are finding trouble grasping knapplc's argument just refuse to see any side other than your own. knapplc has given an honest retort to those few calling him wrong, and in return he got accused of abusing his MOD privileges (which he never has). It's truly quite pathetic.

 

[Overland Park Husker]

Any chance of a suspension after that hit?  I think there may be, especially considering what's happened in the last couple weeks.

Can the NCAA even suspend a player after a game for a hit?

[HuskerJosh]

Any chance of a suspension after that hit?  I think there may be, especially considering what's happened in the last couple weeks.

Can the NCAA even suspend a player after a game for a hit?

Not sure about the NCAA, but the Big 12 can. You think Bo went nuclear after the B12CCG last year? Do that and see the fireworks.

[TheCheshireCat]

There's no point in arguing with knapplc, he'll just delete your posts/thread anyway if he doesn't like it/can't think of a retort.

 

Yes, I clearly don't know how to support the logic of my position, so I've just deleted this whole thread.

 

Obviously not this one, but you have on other ones.

What are you talking about?

 

I have been a member of this board for close to three years now and have never seen ANY moderator (especially one like knapplc, who I respect quite a lot) delete/lock a thread because they weren't winning an argument. We have specific rules for what should/shouldn't be locked in a thread and mods can be banned just as easily as the rest of us for abusing their powers. It's not like the admins/mods all have some secret debate-winning society going on behind closed doors. Quite a few of them just happen to form good opinions.

 

I have read both sides of the discussion, and I think those of you who are finding trouble grasping knapplc's argument just refuse to see any side other than your own. knapplc has given an honest retort to those few calling him wrong, and in return he got accused of abusing his MOD privileges (which he never has). It's truly quite pathetic.

 

 

Keep kissing ass buddy, it's really cute.

 

And yeah, he doesn't delete or lock a thread because he doesn't like something. He'll just ridicule someone for posting a random thought in a new thread with a pompous, superior face palm. It's only locked when it violates board rules - or a personal opinion on what is or isn't a good enough idea.

[bbeerma2]

I think if Knapplc stopped getting into arguments all the time he'd have about half the post-count.

[TMagic]

Head on a swivel, head on a swivel, head on a swivel. That is all I have to say about that.

[knapplc]

I think if we want to turn this into a discussion of a particular poster, it needs to go to the Woodshed. Let's try to remain on topic, please.

[holvy83]

Bottom line, play was not flagged. What does it matter now? The OSU player was not seriously hurt and the what if's are getting old. Now if he would have gotten flagged and the TD taken back then I can see an argument to gripe and some of you would change your tune.

[Fuzzy]

Look at the replay. He didn't hit him with his helmet.

 

Oh really?

 

 

Unless you are on the field watching it, the angles can be too deceiving. If it wasn't called on the field I don't see him getting any trouble at all.

 

They kept saying that the hit was unecessary because the OSU wasn't anywhere near Niles Paul, but it seems to me that the second vid shows that the hit was crucial in his return. The OSU player knew ahead of time that he was going to be popped, i don't like how Martin led with his helmet though. But you know, that special teams hit he had last year on the Ragin' Cajun player was more at a bad angle and helmet led than the OSU hit. some players can take big hits and some can't. Clearly the OSU kid was not able to take the hit.

 

I don't like how they caught Martin and Smith laughing and smiling on the sideline. It probably had nothing to do with the hit, but it makes it appear that we don't care when we hurt someone with a controvesial hit.