|
Replies: 41
| visibility 447
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 45373
Joined: 2012
|
FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 29, 2014, 6:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
I wonder how this thread will go***
Nov 29, 2014, 6:02 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64670]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 41680
Joined: 2004
|
uh, no.***
Nov 29, 2014, 6:03 PM
|
|
SEC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playmaker [396]
TigerPulse: 100%
16
|
Re: uh, no.***
Nov 29, 2014, 6:04 PM
|
|
Nope
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [668]
TigerPulse: 100%
21
|
Re: uh, no.***
Nov 29, 2014, 6:09 PM
|
|
If I was Dabo, I would send a letter to the NCAA and copy every swinging **** I could think of on it. ACC head office, SEC head office, media, the President. Everyone and call for the bowl game suspension to be overturned. It wouldn't do any good, but as performance theater it would shine on light on the obviously BIAS officiating and maybe help lead it to stop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [66859]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 19064
Joined: 2008
|
Uh, Hail no!
Nov 30, 2014, 8:17 AM
[ in reply to uh, no.*** ] |
|
The officials were terrible in several games yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1875]
TigerPulse: 90%
31
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 29, 2014, 6:03 PM
|
|
Absolutely not
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29436]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 10904
Joined: 2013
|
umm. Does spurrier attend AA meetings
Nov 29, 2014, 6:03 PM
|
|
i dont think so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [41702]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 43382
Joined: 1998
|
But he is a quiter!***
Nov 29, 2014, 9:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [168]
TigerPulse: 100%
12
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 29, 2014, 6:07 PM
|
|
Are you freaking kidding? H3ll No!!! It was incidental contact. You've gotta allow some contact. DT got rid of the ball at the last minute. I realize that you want to prevent injuries and all but that was not that hard of a hit. I mean c'mon man this is football for crying out loud!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1899]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected - NO!
Nov 29, 2014, 6:11 PM
|
|
At the very worst, possibly late hit.
Targeting? Rediculous... the refs being paid off.
Too many stupid calls in the recent games. If the refs
are that bad, they need more training, or to be
replaced. 'needs investigation...
fumble play..another one.
A close third, is the DW touchdown, where the replay shows
ball going across the goal line, and shadow under his knee.
Fortunately, that was a score anyway, and didn't cost us.
GO TIGERS!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2384]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected - NO!
Nov 29, 2014, 9:08 PM
|
|
I thought the officiating at WF game was atrocious, but this one took the cake. I don't know which was worse-- the officiating on the field, or the idiots in the replay booth. This targeting call on Anthony was much worse than the one on Robert Smith at WF... and that one was truly terrible. I think the officials need to get some "big boy panties" and let the guys in uniform play football.
The "what fumble?" play was humorous... let's see... the SCar receiver catches the pass, is hit by the defense, struggles to break the tackle, fumbles, and... he was "down"... standing straight up and trying to get a couple of yards. Okay, I get it. That's SEC officiating...
And I truly have no words for the onside kick reversal... I guess reaching up to try to catch the ball constitutes a fair catch signal?
You know, we usually get better officiating calls from SEC crews than from ACC crews, but today was really special.
And at the end of the day, TIGERS RULE!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7834]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 20499
Joined: 2004
|
Of all the bad calls you list the
Nov 29, 2014, 10:11 PM
|
|
Onside kick call was right. They didn't say he signaled fair catch, they said we interfered with him receiving the ball. Which is correct. You must let them catch it, unless it hits the ground first. So let them catch it and clean their clock.
All the others were horrible
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [188]
TigerPulse: 100%
12
|
Re: Of all the bad calls you list the
Nov 30, 2014, 3:22 AM
|
|
The particular rule they cited requires a signaled fair catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [49895]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 25402
Joined: 1999
|
Re: I'll go with Death Valley's reply
Nov 29, 2014, 6:11 PM
|
|
########
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [240]
TigerPulse: 97%
13
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 29, 2014, 6:11 PM
|
|
A penality....YES.....targeting....HE!! nO....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [309]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 29, 2014, 6:11 PM
|
|
That wasn't even a late hit - much less targeting. Crybaby Dillon had to say something to Anthony about it too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4409]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
a joke of a call
Nov 29, 2014, 6:17 PM
|
|
What an abortion....no way that is the intent of that rule. Player safety, i GOT it....but that is comical to me along with them not giving DW the TD on review. They are a complete joke. I wont get into the holding not called all day. The game is simply too fast for some of these clowns. What a #### joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [100]
TigerPulse: 93%
11
|
Re: a joke of a call
Nov 30, 2014, 12:45 PM
|
|
That's okay --- Anthony got ejected but the damage he had wreaked was done. Dylan could not set his feet for the rest of the game and a big reason for that is because we blitzed the HAIL out of the A-gap in the first few quarters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 82%
35
|
if york and I agree on anything….
Nov 29, 2014, 6:26 PM
|
|
it's that Clemson should be playing in the Big XII.
John Swofford literally lives for this ####….
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [100]
TigerPulse: 93%
11
|
Wasn't that The Dude from WV?
Nov 30, 2014, 3:26 AM
|
|
Or was it just somebody pretending to know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [100]
TigerPulse: 93%
11
|
Re: Wasn't that The Dude from WV?
Nov 30, 2014, 12:45 PM
|
|
You tell us, Shane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
You mean Swami?
Nov 30, 2014, 10:01 PM
|
|
or stump?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1447]
TigerPulse: 100%
29
|
The only thing worse than this call...
Nov 29, 2014, 7:12 PM
|
|
...was the fact that they even bothered to continue the charade of a review, afterward.
The call was idiotic, and the Refs likely had a few drinks with the review officials after the game...laughing about it.
Fortunately, Clemson's defense held firm...and Clemson won the game. It's not right that Anthony got ejected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [201]
TigerPulse: 98%
13
|
Re: The only thing worse than this call...
Nov 30, 2014, 5:06 AM
|
|
Agree - no way they even did a review on that call as quick as the Ref announced that it had been reviewed. What a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5777]
TigerPulse: 71%
39
|
IF the ACC doesn't intervene on Clemson's behalf on this
Nov 29, 2014, 7:16 PM
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised...shows the complete lack of class & character of Swofford & Cronies. Plenty of other leagues would step in to correct a wrong against a member--especially when don't by a rival leagues referee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [210]
TigerPulse: 60%
13
|
Zebra Morons
Nov 29, 2014, 8:26 PM
|
|
I didn't recognize the idiots who called the game...was the head ref the brother-in-law of any of the Orange Bowl clowns?! Please give the refs red noses in the future so that they will look the part of clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11128]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
Posts: 13201
Joined: 2014
|
As bad as the targeting call was...
Nov 29, 2014, 8:33 PM
|
|
...and several others, by far the worst call all day was the obvious fumble, that was ruled not a fumble. That was totally ridiculous!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1047]
TigerPulse: 100%
25
|
that was horrible call as well
Nov 29, 2014, 9:20 PM
|
|
However, in regards to the targeting call; It has to be forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Anthony made incidental contact with the SIDE of his face mask but the forcible contact was with his hands when he pushed him down. MAYBE roughing the passer... but targeting?? no effin way. not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5608]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: that was horrible call as well
Nov 30, 2014, 8:00 AM
|
|
If Anthony was going to be ejected for targeting, I would have preferred that he drilled DT instead of giving him a love tap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [702]
TigerPulse: 99%
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2642]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
ACC replay officials need to be ejected.***
Nov 29, 2014, 9:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12506]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
Posts: 10500
Joined: 2011
|
Dabo said it best
Nov 29, 2014, 11:11 PM
|
|
That's bullsh!t right there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [205]
TigerPulse: 84%
13
|
They "took a few minutes"?
Nov 30, 2014, 12:37 AM
|
|
That was the quickest review of the week, and a poor one at that. The broadcast kept showing it in slow-mo, but at normal speed it was clearly not targeting or a vicious hit. A bad call and a ridiculously bad review.
|
|
|
|
|
|
null [null]
TigerPulse: null%
-1
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 30, 2014, 12:41 AM
|
|
No that was a bull crap call! The officials need glasses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5618]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 30, 2014, 8:28 AM
|
|
Ridiculous! Refs ought to be suspended, fined, tarred, feathered, water boarded then punished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17296]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
No, one of the worst calls for targeting***
Nov 30, 2014, 9:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3456]
TigerPulse: 79%
34
|
So is Anthony out for the first half of the bowl game?
Nov 30, 2014, 11:12 AM
|
|
Does that even apply to non-regular season games? It was in the second half, wan't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
Yes he will miss 1st half.***
Nov 30, 2014, 12:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
It was roughing, but no way in hell that was targetting or
Nov 30, 2014, 12:29 PM
|
|
anywhere close to warranting an ejection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [40]
TigerPulse: 80%
5
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 30, 2014, 12:41 PM
|
|
No way! I can understand the PF call but ejection????
How about 15 yards against Dylan Thompson for every #### time he got remotely touched by a Clemson player he made the "throw a flag" motion and whined to the ref????
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8867]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: FB Update: Should Anthony been ejected for targeting foul against Scar?
Nov 30, 2014, 10:00 PM
|
|
No it should not. His first contact was with his hands
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 41
| visibility 447
|
|
|
50
