HuskerJosh
Starter
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.
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. :WTHAnd 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....
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.
...
What are you talking about?Obviously not this one, but you have on other ones.Yes, I clearly don't know how to support the logic of my position, so I've just deleted this whole thread.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.
Can the NCAA even suspend a player after a game for a hit?Any chance of a suspension after that hit? I think there may be, especially considering what's happened in the last couple weeks.
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.Can the NCAA even suspend a player after a game for a hit?Any chance of a suspension after that hit? I think there may be, especially considering what's happened in the last couple weeks.
Keep kissing a$$ buddy, it's really cute.What are you talking about?Obviously not this one, but you have on other ones.Yes, I clearly don't know how to support the logic of my position, so I've just deleted this whole thread.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.
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.
:rant
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.Sparker said: