Colorado #44 Jacob Callier is a dirty player, and should be suspended

Discussion in 'Husker Board' started by workavoidance101, Sep 9, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jedihusker

    jedihusker Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    609
    You are missing something here, however. There are two different types of Targeting fouls, and only one requires the hit to be against a defenseless player. Rule 9-1-4 is "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player" which is what you are referencing. However, there is also Rule 9-1-3, which states:
    And then here is the Note 1 referenced above, which lists what counts as targeting. As stated in Rule 9-1-3 above, any one of these indicators being present can mean it is targeting.
    Again, only of of those elements is required to be called targeting. Now, watching the replay of that hit on Washington, I can easily see the second to last bullet point. He leads with his helmet to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. Here is a screenshot from the video that I think sums it up pretty well:[​IMG]
     
  2. SkerInCo

    SkerInCo Blackshirt
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    More pathetic than a CU "fan" living on a Nebraska board after a win? You've been a member since 2015 yet CU doesn't have a Rivals board? Why? You lurk for 3 years on our board only to start thumping your chest after you win? You sir, are the pathetic one. Get lost loser.

    Also, since you've been lurking here you should have seen the sarcasm in his post.
     
    HuskerDana and SOHusker11 like this.
  3. Hoosker Du

    Hoosker Du Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    19,278
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    The video angle I just saw an the news showed #44 CLEARLY cranking on Martinez's leg. Completely Indisputable. Someone needs to find that footage and post it here. It was disgusting. I hope someone literally smashes that kid's face in next year. To the point that he requires plastic surgery.

    Just found some decent footage on YouTube. Look at the blown up angle...

     
    163 Hoosker Du, Sep 12, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2018
    SOHusker11 likes this.
  4. DaddyBoi

    DaddyBoi Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    363
    He’s an Iowa fan buddy
     
    HeupelsThirdChin likes this.
  5. Hot.Carl

    Hot.Carl Newbie
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    27
    In his book, Tom says the decision to retain Phillips to provide "needed structure" was his own decision, as the Menninger diagnosis was "no major psych issues".
     
  6. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    If people don't like the cyber bullying, then maybe they shouldn't go to a football fan board of an opposing team of which their own fan base has literally bullied and vandalized while "guests" in their stadium, and then defend some punk player deliberately hurting a defenseless player.

    They are, evidently more stupid and clueless than even I thought if they can't fathom the question, WHAT DO THEY EXPECT? when coming over here saying that crap.

    That's not only classless on their fans' part, but pathetic they don't realize a cause and affect. It must be that legal weed they have. Maybe it DOES kill brain cells.
     
    HuskerDana and timnsun like this.
  7. jedihusker

    jedihusker Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    609
    Another thing I saw, that I think gives a pretty good idea of what happened, which I haven't seen shared on here, is a picture from an LJS article about the whole thing.[​IMG]
    You can clearly see AMart crying out in pain when the picture is taken, meaning whatever hurt him just happened or is happening as the picture is taken. If you look around him, you see a few Nebraska lineman standing and some other CU players standing around, meaning this picture was clearly taken after the play was pretty much over, not during the play. It's pretty clear to me from this picture, if it wasn't already from the video, the injury didn't happen during the course of the play. You can also see #44 of Colorado is still on the ground at AMart's leg doing something at this point, and other video from other angles I think make it pretty clear what that something was.

    I also haven't seen this shared in this thread, but I think this video from the same LJS article does a pretty good job showing very clearly what happened.
    You can clearly see him grab his leg, then AMart goes down, then #44 looks to the right for some reason, then he really bears down on twisting his leg. Here is the LJS article where I saw the picture and video.
    https://journalstar.com/sports/husk...cle_296b6a54-4d3f-55cb-ba4f-110a8e4e4c66.html
     
    SOHusker11 likes this.
  8. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    I saw that, too and made a comment in another thread about him looking around before he twisted. I came to the conclusion he was looking to see where the refs were.
     
    dinglefritz and SOHusker11 like this.
  9. jedihusker

    jedihusker Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    609
    I thought that might have been the case too, although it's funny because in that video I posted with the red circle around the CU player, you can see a ref walking in from the right near the end that should have a perfect view of what's happening, so if that's what he was looking for, he didn't do a great job, although it apparently didn't matter.
     
    dinglefritz likes this.
  10. jedihusker

    jedihusker Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    609
    Disagree completely on the hit by 53, I thought it was late when I saw it live, and watching the play over and over confirms exactly what I thought I saw. While I agree the fact those replays are slowed down make it look worse, watch the play at normal speed, and it still doesn't look good. This isn't a case of a guy who was flying to the play and just happened to land in there a millisecond late or something.

    He is standing in front of the pile surrounding AMart as he starts to go down, you see him run over and stop about 3 yards away and watch, and then well after AMart's knee has already touched the ground, he lunges forward and pushes him over backward. It was a completely unnecessary hit, as AMart was clearly down and had already been down for a while; and as already stated, you can clearly see him stop and look that he is down and then lunge forward and shove him over.
     
  11. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    plus he speared him with his helmet crown, something I was taught was illegal when I trained to be a ref years ago
     
  12. jedihusker

    jedihusker Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    609
    True. If you want to get into technical rules, and not just use common sense that he clearly dove into the pile after he knew he was down, you could make a case for one of two different penalties there. If you want to make a case for targeting, you could pretty easily. AMart would qualify as a defenseless player under the targeting rule, as "A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped." After considering him a defenseless player, it only requires him do one of the things mentioned as possible targeting, and from what I see you could easily see it as one of the last two bullet points from Note 1 I posted above on targeting, either: "Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area" or "Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet".

    Even if you don't go with that, you could just go with a pretty simple late hit. AMart was clearly down and the ball dead before the hit happened, as his knee had touched the ground. 54 was easily in position to see all that before he even started his hit, and rule 9-1-7a states: "There shall be no piling on, falling on or throwing the body on an opponent after the ball becomes dead." The ball became dead as soon as AMart's knee touched the ground, and it's pretty obvious from his positioning that 54 knew this.
     
  13. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    I have permanent tinnitus so have a tough time hearing whistles on replay. Can you tell when the whistle blows? That could, obviously, influence the whole scenario of late hit non call.
     
  14. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    As I said before I bitch about a no call I will mentally switch the uniforms. If I would be a ok with the penalty called on my team then I’ll complain.

    The only play, in all these discussions, that I would bitch about is the leg twist.

    It’s a game played by and officiated by humans.
     
  15. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    If you want this to be called targeting then I don’t know what to tell you. His head is up and he is wrapping up. In the picture you provided, at contact I can literally see the top of his helmet, otherwise known as the crown.

    If this is targeting we need to take the shoulder pads off and play flag.
     
    Crushinator likes this.
  16. Hoosker Du

    Hoosker Du Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    19,278
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    Yeah, the hit by #53 didn't look agregious to me. Maybe a little late, but nothing that should warrant a flag. The torquing on AM's leg though...the PAC-12 is completely f**ked for not suspending that kid for at least a game or two. What a little c*nt!!
     
    Crushinator and HuskerDana like this.
  17. HuskerBlueDevil

    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,139
    Likes Received:
    695
    That assumes that any of what the poster claims actually happened. Given the history of CU fans and players making completely false claims about NU fans/players, and then piling more and more falsehoods on top of them in the perfect storm of the creation of an urban myth, I would not automatically believe anything said about 44's Twitter account.
     
    timnsun, SOHusker11 and HuskerDana like this.
  18. dinglefritz

    dinglefritz College Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Messages:
    22,014
    Likes Received:
    13,575
    Pac 12 officials are the worst officials in college football bar none.
     
  19. Lincoln100

    Lincoln100 Recruiting Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,722
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    watching that does make me want to punch him in his face
     
    Hoosker Du and SOHusker11 like this.
  20. F5Tornado

    F5Tornado Senior
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,156
    Likes Received:
    1,989
    I think we need the Warren Commission to check this out!;)
     
  21. Hoosker Du

    Hoosker Du Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    19,278
    Likes Received:
    5,932
    Really? You're going to go completely Samuel L. Jackson because of a football play?? Vengeance is coming for our p*ssy friend Callier, but I don't think it's coming from God, unless God is 6'5" 320 and plays OLine for Nebraska.
     
  22. dinglefritz

    dinglefritz College Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Messages:
    22,014
    Likes Received:
    13,575
    I don't care if that had been a Husker on a Buff. The guy that did that should have been thrown out of the game and suspended for the season. Intentionally injuring another player is not acceptable at any level. I would expect to see that from a high school knucklehead, not a D-1 player. That was so Colorado.
     
    SnohomishRed and SOHusker11 like this.
  23. Hastings4Huskers

    Hastings4Huskers Redshirt Freshman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    837
    Likes Received:
    1,014
    The o lineman standing there should of snatched #44 up and chucked him across the field flag or no flag. I know we would have been penalized but the big uglies need to send a message.
     
  24. headcard

    headcard Nebraska Legend
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    Messages:
    29,339
    Likes Received:
    16,106
    I get that, but could you imagine all the posters losing their minds about us being undisciplined, etc if we got a penalty there? The resident board contrarian probably would have had to go to the ER with his 4-hour erection.
     
    Hastings4Huskers and SOHusker11 like this.
  25. CheeseRunza

    CheeseRunza Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    328
    Are you saying that under no circumstances or in any situation could a ref reasonably determine that the example I posted be interpreted as a penalty? I'm not saying that I think it should be a penalty, only that it reasonably could be a penalty. As I have said, I don't particularly like the rules as they are defined, to take hitting out of the game, but I understand the need. I'm just saying that there is subjectivity involved, and the play I posted could be interpreted either way. We have seen it called against Kenny Bell play, Eric Martin etc.

    Another Example. Hmmm, looks like the defender is moving towards the play.
    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/10/7/16441828/lsu-florida-targeting-update-2017
     
    185 CheeseRunza, Sep 13, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  26. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    When I called it spearing, I was referring on the tape above to the guy coming in low from the right and closer to us the viewers than #44. He comes in with his head down and you can see him putting his head lower just before he hits AM when he is driving into hit him.. I couldn't get his number. So, I do't know if you are talking about the same guy I saw. But, again, I don't know about the whistle, but AM was definitely down.

    And, yeah, I get your point, But if I saw a NU player doing that I would call it dirty.
     
  27. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    You are confusing me. In the LSU video, that is a blindside. That makes the defensive player, by definition, defenseless. The offensive player came from behind him and laid him out.

    The post that you are quoting is when I was talking about the play on Washington. Where Washington is a runner, his forward progress had not been stopped, so by definition he is not defenseless. The only way that would even be considered targeting is if he led with the top of his helmet and hit Washington in the head or neck. The defenders can see the runner, his facemask makes contact, not the crown of the helmet.

    Now if you are talking about the hit on Reed, The WR came from in front of Reed, not from behind, just because Reed didn't appear to see him coming doesn't mean he couldn't or shouldn't have seen him coming. I don't think that meets the definition of a blindside hit. If this is the play you are referencing, then I would say that a reasonable person would not call that a penalty. I am not going to say would never be called because it refs call things all the time that are wrong. They could be in a bad position, their view could be obstructed a little or any number of things. But if you are to look at that play the day after, as an evaluation of the official, no way is the hit on Reed a penalty.
     
  28. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    You are talking about a different play. We were discussing the hit on Washington.
     
  29. Redondo

    Redondo Sophomore
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    727
    sorry, but as I said in my edit above on AM, I would call the spearing dirty, also, if it was by a NU player.
     
  30. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    Are you talking about 53, the one who comes in and cleans up the tackle? The one who dives in at the end? You think that is spearing? I can't get freeze frame and repost on my phone, but he is head first because he is diving. I am not sure his head even makes contact with Martinez, because his elbows are leading the way and his eyes are up.

    Again. the twisting of the ankle by 44 was uncalled for and dirty, the rest of these plays are just football.
     
    Redondo and cam1058 like this.
  31. TheBeav815

    TheBeav815 Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    17,756
    Likes Received:
    6,529
    Location:
    Chicago Suburbs
    If you watch that slow-mo supercut, it's VERY obvious that 44 gets in on the tackle, looks to see that Martinez is down, and then goes, "It's wrenchin' time!"

    Dirty f***ing play man. Kid should be suspended. Sounds like the Pac 12 isn't going to, though.
     
    SOHusker11 and SnohomishRed like this.
  32. CheeseRunza

    CheeseRunza Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    328
    I initially responded to the Washington post by referring to the hit on Reed as being “closer to targeting” than the Washington play. You responded that it was a shoulder to shoulder (which I believe is incorrect) and doesn’t meet the definition of defenseless. You tend to post your opinions as though they are fact. I posted an article which discusses targeting calls, intending to illustrate that the Reed play could be interpreted as a penalty, depending on what is considered a blindside block. Ftw responded to my post that Gamboa should have been ejected. You responded to Ftw that there was more to the rule than what I posted (I posted a link to an article discussing the rule). I was responding to this post, that I assumed, by logically tracking through the direct responses, you were referring to the Reed play. I posted the LSU play as an example of a play where the defensive player was in pursuit and aggressively involved in the play, but was blindsided up high, resulting in a flag. Not totally dissimilar to the Reed play. I was merely trying to illustrate that there is a fine line and different refs, fans, coaches, players will always interpret the plays differently. They are subjective penalties. There is room for everyone to have an opinion. If you look at the play I was referencing, the offensive player started down the 30+ yard line and made contact with Read on the 29+ yard line. So technically he was behind the defender. We are splitting hairs here. You could probably ask 100 people if it was a blindside block and get 100 answers. But I would guess there are quite a few that would view it as a blindside block and that, coupled with the contact near the head and neck area, could be interpreted as targeting.

    I use the same kind of litmus test that you are talking about. Would I like it if the situation were reversed. I also like to consider whether the play (no call) results in any significant advantage to either team (no harm, no foul). The difference is, that I recognize that others may view the play differently than me. You tend to post your opinions as facts and use absolutes in an attempt to add validity to your opinion while discounting others. You state in this response that “as an evaluation of the official, no way is the hit on Reed a penalty”. Can you really say that there is “no way” that an evaluator would see that play as a penalty? What if the play was initially called a penalty on the field, are they going to say the ref was wrong to make that subjective call? You said, in a response to me earlier that “we all want that call if it’s Morgan getting lit up”. How can you possibly determine what we “all” want. I honestly would not have a problem if the situations were reversed and the flag would not have been thrown. (I assume you are talking about the hit Reed made on the Colorado receiver, resulting in a flag). The ball was in the vicinity of the receiver, no helmet to helmet, it was not an overly viscous hit, his head was up at contact, and no significant advantage was gained by the hit or would have been gained by not throwing the flag. Would it have been better had he recognized that the receiver had given up on the play and pulled up? Of course, you never want to put the decision of a subjective call in the hands of a ref if you don’t have to.

    In any case, my original point was that the play I referenced (the block on Reed) was “closer” to targeting than the Washington play. Personally I wouldn’t flag any of the plays discussed (except maybe the leg twisting). But with the way the rule is written and in today’s climate, some “could” have been ruled a penalty, with the one I referenced riding a fine line.
     
    192 CheeseRunza, Sep 13, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  33. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque


    I post my opinion. If you want to read it as "fact" that is on you not me.

    If you want to take terms like "we all" and "no way" literally, again that is on you. The comment where I wrote "we all want that call if Morgan is getting lit up" wasn't to be taken literally. It's like saying no one would kick Jennifer Aniston out of bed. Of course there is at least one fool that would. The point remains, 99.999% of Nebraska fans think if Morgan was the one getting hit across the middle, that the play should draw a flag. The rest of these criticisms of the officials are being made by 1 or 2 people and do not meet the "reasonable person" standard.

    It's a message board, if you don't like what I post, skip on by. I don't care but to get on me because I post an opinion that you don't like, that sir is a you problem.
     
  34. CheeseRunza

    CheeseRunza Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    328
    It was you who responded to my initial post, not the other way round. I'm fine with you having an opinion. I have mine as well. The rest is apparently just a difference in thinking and writing styles I guess. We could go on about how and why people use absolutes and black and white thinking, but I'll just note for future reference that your posts should not be taken literally.
     
  35. Tuco Salamanca

    Tuco Salamanca Offensive Coordinator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    Location:
    Albuquerque
    Bored with you. Carry on
     
  36. CheeseRunza

    CheeseRunza Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    328
    right back atcha
     
  37. DaddyBoi

    DaddyBoi Walk On
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    363
    ^^ sick burn
     
    HeupelsThirdChin likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page