TexasRebel said:

---

It doesn't have to be crown to crown.

It doesn't even have to include the crown, but it does. Straight to the head/neck area. In an upward motion, even. Against a receiver who is in the act of catching a pass.

---

Serious reading comprehension issues here. I was responding to those in this thread who said crown to crown.

Even my teasip friends said it was targeting.

Onionman said:

---

Elmer Dobkins said:

---

Onionman said:

---

Initially I thought we would get the call.

Looked like targeting to me and the defender gets freakin hurt!

If our guy was the one hurt, we definitely get the call, IMO.

---

Eugene Semko in the replay booth, zero chance A&M gets the call.

---

Wasn't he the one when Cougar high clearly had a first down against sips and could win the game and he called it not a 1st down?

---

Who?

Nobody has said crown to crown.

Yes

Unlike you I have some intelligence. What you stated is deflection bc it infers crown to crown is required.

So if that's not what you were inferring than you need to do better at making a coherent statement.

Tramp96 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

It doesn't have to be crown to crown.

It doesn't even have to include the crown, but it does. Straight to the head/neck area. In an upward motion, even. Against a receiver who is in the act of catching a pass.

---

Serious reading comprehension issues here. I was responding to those in this thread who said crown to crown.

---

The title of the thread is "Helmet to Helmet". Targeting aside, did the Miami player's helmet make forecable contact with Ruben Owens's helmet?

Onionman said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

He didn't leave his feet.

Whoever said it's crown to crown is on crack. It's not.

It's not targeting. Period. Don't know what else to tell you, but THAT is NOT targeting.

---

Why do you even spend time here?

If Tech is involved in a similar play and there is a no call you will be crying your @ss off.

---

No I wouldn't because THAT IS NOT TARGETING.

Sorry, but it isn't. And I don't even like Miami. I predicted yall would win easily. My pride would want to blame the refs here, but I can't, because I know the rules of targeting and that ain't it.

When the crown of the offensive player is lower than the face mask of the defender, they will never call targeting. That's just a fact.

Tramp96 said:

---

Onionman said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

He didn't leave his feet.

Whoever said it's crown to crown is on crack. It's not.

It's not targeting. Period. Don't know what else to tell you, but THAT is NOT targeting.

---

Why do you even spend time here?

If Tech is involved in a similar play and there is a no call you will be crying your @ss off.

---

No I wouldn't because THAT IS NOT TARGETING.

Sorry, but it isn't. And I don't even like Miami. I predicted yall would win easily. My pride would want to blame the refs here, but I can't, because I know the rules of targeting and that ain't it.

When the crown of the offensive player is lower than the face mask of the defender, they will never call targeting. That's just a fact.

---

You know the rules...LOL! The refs don't even know the targeting rules!

You said that NEVER would be called. I can post 50 gifs of plays that were called that were less than that play.

Tramp96 said:

---

Onionman said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

He didn't leave his feet.

Whoever said it's crown to crown is on crack. It's not.

It's not targeting. Period. Don't know what else to tell you, but THAT is NOT targeting.

---

Why do you even spend time here?

If Tech is involved in a similar play and there is a no call you will be crying your @ss off.

---

No I wouldn't because THAT IS NOT TARGETING.

Sorry, but it isn't. And I don't even like Miami. I predicted yall would win easily. My pride would want to blame the refs here, but I can't, because I know the rules of targeting and that ain't it.

When the crown of the offensive player is lower than the face mask of the defender, they will never call targeting. That's just a fact.

---

Then you don't understand the penalty.

As Rafiki would state

"Look Harder"

The only reason I'm entertaining you is bc of how far off you are on this one.

Some of you have said at times the powers that be have, in so many words, already selected who they want to go to the BIG playoff. I always thought that was silly and had no merit. After today I'm beginning to come around to that way of thinking. A&M has always been the low kicking boy of the nations athletic programs forever. Even TCEH is getting better attention than A&M is. I'm beginning to come around to that way of thinking! The refs can make a great deal of difference in the outcome of a game, such was today!

Or just look at all.

Tramp96 said:

---

When the crown of the offensive player is lower than the face mask of the defender, they will never call targeting. That's just a fact.

---

Lol, this was called targeting. You dont know wtf you are talking about with this "crown" nonsense.

Yes and bro even knocked himself out cold. There was plenty of time to review it for targeting.

TexasRebel said:

---

Or just look at all.

---

We are dealing with a red raider.

Tramp96 said:

---

FobTies said:

---

Head and neck area of a defenseless receiver?

***add this gif to OP***

---

That by definition is NOT targeting. The defender was standing straight up. They will never call targeting in that situation. Never. Sorry.

---

What was the call here then? Here's a hint: It was targeting.

NEVER will be called...GTFOH!

It's a little interesting when that official pulls his flag.

Bad targeting calls in past other games doesn't make this a targeting call. Good god people you are better than that.

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

But I'm sure the TexAgs brain trust here is more knowledgeable than a veteran SEC ref and a veteran CUSA ref.

I've no doubt.

Tramp96 said:

---

Bad targeting calls in past other games doesn't make this a targeting call. Good god people you are better than that.

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

But I'm sure the TexAgs brain trust here is more knowledgeable than a veteran SEC ref and a veteran CUSA ref.

---

Keep changing the goal posts.

You claimed it would NEVER be called twice in your post. I at least proved you completely and utterly wrong there. And can keep doing it if you want me to.

Just say you are full of sh*t and move on.

Tramp96 said:

---

Bad targeting calls in past other games doesn't make this a targeting call. Good god people you are better than that.

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

But I'm sure the TexAgs brain trust here is more knowledgeable than a veteran SEC ref and a veteran CUSA ref.

---

The expert scientists said the virus came from a wet market. Trust the authorities.

You lost all credibility when you said "it would never be called, thats a fact". Then just said, "ok, it will be called, but bad calls dont make this targeting".

Keep digging, lol!

Considering the uncalled late hits OOB, the refs ****ed this team over. That last non-call was pathetic. Shoulda been first and goal at the 1 yard line. They might not have made it but at least we would have gotten a fair shake.

Tramp96 said:

---

Bad targeting calls in past other games doesn't make this a targeting call. Good god people you are better than that.

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

But I'm sure the TexAgs brain trust here is more knowledgeable than a veteran SEC ref and a veteran CUSA ref.

---

Oh an SEC ref, do they ever get a call right?

The officials are so inconsistent with the rule and don't even know it, yet Tramp is 100% certain that was NOT targeting and never called because he has 2 friends that happen to be officials. What a joke.

In fairness, we should be nicer to Tramp; AI is rapidly making the best jobs available to Red Raider grads obsolete:

Tramp96 said:

---

Onionman said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

He didn't leave his feet.

Whoever said it's crown to crown is on crack. It's not.

It's not targeting. Period. Don't know what else to tell you, but THAT is NOT targeting.

---

Why do you even spend time here?

If Tech is involved in a similar play and there is a no call you will be crying your @ss off.

---

No I wouldn't because THAT IS NOT TARGETING.

Sorry, but it isn't. And I don't even like Miami. I predicted yall would win easily. My pride would want to blame the refs here, but I can't, because I know the rules of targeting and that ain't it.

When the crown of the offensive player is lower than the face mask of the defender, they will never call targeting. That's just a fact.

---

Seriously dude, just shut up. Your lack of knowledge is embarrassing.

2 ways to get targeting. One involves the crown plus indicators (launch, follow-through, etc.). The other is hitting a defenseless player forceably in the head/neck area. Does not matter how the defender hits him.

Plus, your contention that he is "straight up" is factually wrong. You are confused because you're only looking at the gif. Look at the other angles. Dude was launching and OFF HIS FEET, not that it matters. Would be targeting without the launch.


That was 100% targeting and you are an imbecile.

I could keep going on why Tramp is an idiot.

Targeting was called when a player hit Noah Thomas in the hip with the crown last year. All your stupid **** about helmet to helmet and thinking that somehow that hit today was totally disqualified from targeting is just nonsense.

Player can and does get flagged for targeting by leading with the crown on any part of the other player's body --- OR --- by hitting a defenseless player (ie one in the act of catching a pass) in the head/neck area. That's all it takes. Nothing more. Those get called and upheld all the time. But as onion says it is so inconsistent as to be maddening.

Go ask your butt buddies about the actual rules. I don't expect you to admit you're wrong. But you're wrong.

Dacama said:

---

Shouldn't have to win by a ref bailout. Terrible run defense, worst offense.
Season's over and sunshine pumpers will have to find new hobbies

---

Tell me again about the nail in the coffin when we beat bama with Johnny. Penalties are repercussions for mistakes, not bailouts.

I'm not sure I would trust a college or NFL official if they told me the sky is blue. I might trust an MLB umpires, but I would still want to consult ABS.

Tramp96 said:

---

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

---

I found their picture.

Onionman said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

I have two very close friends who are college officials. One is an SEC ref, the other is a Conference USA ref. Sent the clip to both. Both said not targeting.

---

I found their picture.

---

That's an insult to bozo.

Absolutely targeting. Still i dont know if that changes the play calling and putting decision-making in reeds hands. First and goal os run run run but klein seems to think screen passes behind the Los are better.

Dacama said:

---

Shouldn't have to win by a ref bailout. Terrible run defense, worst offense.
Season's over and sunshine pumpers will have to find new hobbies

---

Already got bailed out once on Reed drawing a roughing call.

I wasn't targeting. I don't think most of you know what targeting is.