Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

ESPN rules analyst Bill Lemonnier, supporting a targeting call: "Definitely defenseless player. Strong hit to the head/neck area. This shouldn't take long." After review, there was no targeting. Lemonnier then explained why the refs reached that conclusion. 🏈🦓🎙️ #CFP

Awful Announcing

426,302 subscribers

850,126 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik Sport #CFP

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

32 Kommentare

Profilbild von Remington

Remingtonvor 8 Monaten

Incidental contact. Both were looking at ball and ran into each other

Profilbild von MS ⚾️

MS ⚾️vor 8 Monaten

I was so confused the whole replay conversation, it looked clear to me like both were going for the ball and inadvertently knocked heads. They never even considered it or brought it up, even after the call. Terrible coverage

Profilbild von Brian Eich

Brian Eichvor 8 Monaten

Not targeting, just two guys running opposite directions colliding head first. Defender was looking at/going for ball just like receiver.

Profilbild von TheDogeKilluminati

TheDogeKilluminativor 8 Monaten

announcers jumping the gun again lol refs nailed it

Profilbild von Richard “Dick” Whitman (🌎/21M)

Richard “Dick” Whitman (🌎/21M)vor 8 Monaten

Bill Lemonnier is really making a name for himself

Profilbild von Shawn Kane, M.D. FAAFP, FACSM

Shawn Kane, M.D. FAAFP, FACSMvor 8 Monaten

They would be better off asking the opinion of a dude in the last row of the upper deck who is at least a 6 pack in

Profilbild von ColumbusCane

ColumbusCanevor 8 Monaten

Let’s be real, the rules analysts bring nothing to the game

Profilbild von Not that Chris Smith

Not that Chris Smithvor 8 Monaten

The next time Bill Lemonier is correct it will be the first 🤦‍♂️

Profilbild von Marcio e só

Marcio e sóvor 8 Monaten

It was a clear targeting penalty then he had to spin and justify the refs call.

Profilbild von Tampa Bay Crimson Tide 🐘

Tampa Bay Crimson Tide 🐘vor 8 Monaten

Let’s stop with the “rules experts”. Someone do something

Profilbild von Trent Vandersnick

Trent Vandersnickvor 8 Monaten

He's 77 and hasn't officiated in 10 yrs

Profilbild von Martin McGarin

Martin McGarinvor 8 Monaten

ESPN’s SEC favoritism has made this hard to watch.

Profilbild von Mikko Dončić (Acknowledge Him) ☝️🏴‍☠️🇫🇮

Mikko Dončić (Acknowledge Him) ☝️🏴‍☠️🇫🇮vor 8 Monaten

He's such a fucking clown. All rules analysts are.

Profilbild von Vincent Roxbury

Vincent Roxburyvor 8 Monaten

Will be interesting to see if Miami gets hosed. Yep confirmed

Profilbild von Keith Herndon

Keith Herndonvor 8 Monaten

Can we just get these retired jackasses off the air? Not one fan needs an extra official guessing what the actual officials are going to call after a review. 🙄🙄

Profilbild von M. Gustave

M. Gustavevor 8 Monaten

It’s like the rules ANALyst wasn’t watching the game and just said a general statement.

Profilbild von Newsance™

Newsance™vor 8 Monaten

They tried to keep old miss in the game so hard! 😂

Profilbild von Ydobson

Ydobsonvor 8 Monaten

I hate that a player gets ejected for targeting too. Give the 15 yards. But ejected. Dumb.

Profilbild von Bender

Bendervor 8 Monaten

This is the dumbest idea ever. And tonight might bring it to an end. Asking these guys to weigh in before the call is made is literally revealing how subjective any penalty is. End this practice immediately.

Profilbild von Rich

Richvor 8 Monaten

I agree with the ruling..they collided...he didn't lower his head and target the reciever. COLLEGE DOES IT BETTER THEN THE NFL. WHY IS THAT

Profilbild von Rick (We Don’t Talk About) Bruno

Rick (We Don’t Talk About) Brunovor 8 Monaten

Weather forecasters are right more than Lemonnier.

Profilbild von William Wallace

William Wallacevor 8 Monaten

I thought the defensive player was making a play for the ball and got hit on the side of his helmet. No penalty. Rules analysts should have picked it up. Bad call in the booth.

Profilbild von Bradley Dunn

Bradley Dunnvor 8 Monaten

He wasn’t that good as a Big Ten official, and that was decades ago.

Profilbild von CanesRule26

CanesRule26vor 8 Monaten

Yet, the slide away from the helmet on Lucas is??? Classic officiating against Miami

Profilbild von SD

SDvor 8 Monaten

He was awful. His a mouthpiece for disney and espn. He got the call to back the cheating refs publicly

Profilbild von SadWisconsinFan

SadWisconsinFanvor 8 Monaten

I’ve always said the “rules analysts” are just referees PR team

Profilbild von CLT Pet Peeves

CLT Pet Peevesvor 8 Monaten

pathetic

Profilbild von Derek Ernst

Derek Ernstvor 8 Monaten

He was wrong on every call they asked him about lol

Profilbild von Stevarino1020

Stevarino1020vor 8 Monaten

If the player leaves their feet to launch themselves at an opponent If the player crouches before making a tackle to create maximum force If the player leads with their helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact the head or neck area of an opposing player If the player lowers their head before making a tackle and makes forcible contact with the crown of the helmet The defender hit first with his head he was not vertical -paragraph in bold applies -targeting

Profilbild von 𝕁𝕒𝕤𝕠𝕟 𝕄𝕠𝕣𝕣𝕚𝕤

𝕁𝕒𝕤𝕠𝕟 𝕄𝕠𝕣𝕣𝕚𝕤vor 8 Monaten

The rules official was just riding the fence……give us your opinion, but he went with the on field officials even when it was overturned when he said it was targeting at first.

Profilbild von Mike McCallister

Mike McCallistervor 8 Monaten

This reverse call almost swung the entire game. Instead of 1st down inside the 30, and likely 6-0 or even 10-0, miami punts a few plays later and ole miss scores to go up 7-3. That’s a 10 point swing! BS to pick up the flag, and even more BS on the explanation.

Profilbild von Britt White

Britt Whitevor 8 Monaten

He realized there was no “indicator,” whatever the shit that means. The targeting rule is a disaster and needs to be thrown in the trashcan.

Ähnliche Videos

Scott Van Pelt: “I don’t care who it is. That’s targeting 100 times out of 100. It wasn’t [called] in this case.” Dusty Dvoracek: “I thought it was targeting in the moment. I picked up the phone, made a few phone calls. I talked to Bill Lemonnier, who I think is one of the absolute best, works for us at ESPN/ABC as a rules expert, and he said verbatim: ‘It’s a defenseless player, there was an upwards thrust indicator, forceable contact to the head or neck area. It’s targeting.’”

Scott Van Pelt: “I don’t care who it is. That’s targeting 100 times out of 100. It wasn’t [called] in this case.” Dusty Dvoracek: “I thought it was targeting in the moment. I picked up the phone, made a few phone calls. I talked to Bill Lemonnier, who I think is one of the absolute best, works for us at ESPN/ABC as a rules expert, and he said verbatim: ‘It’s a defenseless player, there was an upwards thrust indicator, forceable contact to the head or neck area. It’s targeting.’”

CFB Kings

3,929,667 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Before the Chiefs TD, there was a facemask call against the Bills that Tony Romo and CBS rules analyst Gene Steratore disagreed with. 🏈🦓🎙️ #NFL

Before the Chiefs TD, there was a facemask call against the Bills that Tony Romo and CBS rules analyst Gene Steratore disagreed with. 🏈🦓🎙️ #NFL

Awful Announcing

108,958 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Georgia is penalized for sideline interference after an official runs into Parker Jones (No. 39) -- who is not even active for the game -- on the sideline. "That's a good call."- ESPN rules analyst Matt Austin 🏈🦓 #CFP

Georgia is penalized for sideline interference after an official runs into Parker Jones (No. 39) -- who is not even active for the game -- on the sideline. "That's a good call."- ESPN rules analyst Matt Austin 🏈🦓 #CFP

Awful Announcing

289,439 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

“This has to be targeting,” says Kenny Dillingham to the officials during ASU’s CFP matchup with Texas. A breakdown by Jomboy Media goes in depth on the game, including the controversial no targeting call. The video also includes a lip reading of Dillingham asking the refs if Melquan Stovall was defenseless (a criteria for targeting). Full breakdown is available here:

“This has to be targeting,” says Kenny Dillingham to the officials during ASU’s CFP matchup with Texas. A breakdown by Jomboy Media goes in depth on the game, including the controversial no targeting call. The video also includes a lip reading of Dillingham asking the refs if Melquan Stovall was defenseless (a criteria for targeting). Full breakdown is available here:

Sun Devil Daily

186,618 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"We definitely have a defenseless receiver and just as he's turning after catching the ball, he gets hit in the head by the defender. I would not be surprised if this is called targeting from the booth." Despite what Matt Austin said, this was NOT called targeting.

"We definitely have a defenseless receiver and just as he's turning after catching the ball, he gets hit in the head by the defender. I would not be surprised if this is called targeting from the booth." Despite what Matt Austin said, this was NOT called targeting.

Awful Announcing

265,993 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Absurd Replay ruling that this isn't a targeting foul. Of course it is: 1. Defenseless player 2. Attacks and leads with the helmet 3. Makes forcible contact with helmet to head/neck

Absurd Replay ruling that this isn't a targeting foul. Of course it is: 1. Defenseless player 2. Attacks and leads with the helmet 3. Makes forcible contact with helmet to head/neck

Terry McAulay

24,315 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Shane Beamer went crazy at officials... Star QB LaNorris Sellers left the game after taking a hit to the head. Play resumed with the backup QB. And then play was finally stopped to check for targeting- in the middle of potentially a huge South Carolina play. 🏈🦓 #CFB

Shane Beamer went crazy at officials... Star QB LaNorris Sellers left the game after taking a hit to the head. Play resumed with the backup QB. And then play was finally stopped to check for targeting- in the middle of potentially a huge South Carolina play. 🏈🦓 #CFB

Awful Announcing

1,068,228 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.

Frank Rossi

10,688 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

LaNorris Sellers gets hit in the head with targeting and between the hit on the field and the decision to review the play for targeting there was a total elapsed time of 1 Minute and 39.28 Seconds. This time carried over into the next play from scrimmage where Luke Doty had Nyck Harbor for a huge play, probably a touchdown was 2.64 seconds. What the hell were you doing for the first minute and a half while our QB was laying on his face after an obvious targeting. Such bush league ass officiating SEC Officiating #Gamecocks

LaNorris Sellers gets hit in the head with targeting and between the hit on the field and the decision to review the play for targeting there was a total elapsed time of 1 Minute and 39.28 Seconds. This time carried over into the next play from scrimmage where Luke Doty had Nyck Harbor for a huge play, probably a touchdown was 2.64 seconds. What the hell were you doing for the first minute and a half while our QB was laying on his face after an obvious targeting. Such bush league ass officiating SEC Officiating #Gamecocks

☈ Chris Jackson ☈

663,376 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

ESPN rules analyst Dave Jackson on the Hurricanes' game-tying goal: "To me, this is a no-brainer. It's an easy call... That's a good goal all day. Glad they didn't challenge, because I guarantee you they would have lost the challenge, and they'd be killing a penalty now." 🏒🎙️🦓

ESPN rules analyst Dave Jackson on the Hurricanes' game-tying goal: "To me, this is a no-brainer. It's an easy call... That's a good goal all day. Glad they didn't challenge, because I guarantee you they would have lost the challenge, and they'd be killing a penalty now." 🏒🎙️🦓

Awful Announcing

129,322 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

The targeting foul against Zack Orr of NCC Football has been overturned, and he will be eligible to start in Saturday's #d3fb National Semifinal vs. Susquehanna Football at 3:30pm EST / 2:30pm CST. I spoke with Steve Shaw, the NCAA's National Coordinator of Officials, about the overturn this morning. Note that the provision in question is whether or not Springfield Football QB Drew Heenan qualified under the rules as a "defenseless player," as the following is one such definition in the NCAA Football Rulebook: "A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped." If a defenseless player is hit in the neck or head region by an opponent, then targeting is a proper call under the rules. Steve said: “We’re very clear that he's not defenseless until he is down. And if you go back and look at the video on the play…he's wrapped up and he's going down. And the contact is with [the] runner just as he's going to the ground. So he really has not transitioned to a defenseless player yet. You know, you can make the argument that, well, if he's wrapped up, he's defenseless and he can't really defend himself. But from a replay perspective, we needed a bright line that that was not a judgment, but a bright line. And that is, [he] has to be down, considered down before he's defenseless….He's just beginning to go down and be down. And so we wouldn't consider him down at the time that he's hit. And there's no crown of the helmet involved. The helmet is clearly to the side. And so, from a replay perspective, rules are very clear. You've got to be able to confirm all aspects of targeting for it to be targeting. You couldn't confirm that he was down and then hit. So we didn't give him defenseless status....And that's why the targeting was overturned.” Steve also taught me about something that is important. While regular replay reviews can come out as "confirmed," "overturned," or "stands" (which means that there is not conclusive evidence to overturn, but there isn't a full confirmation of the original call either), targeting calls do not have a "stands" option when they are reviewed. In other words, they are viewed anew and either every element necessary for targeting must be confirmed, or it is overturned. Think of it as being innocent until proven guilty in the review process for targeting. In this case, he was clear to underscore that the elements could have been argued to have existed, but it would have, at best, been a "call stands" decision, which is not sufficient to uphold a targeting call. Steve also expressed the hopes that the instant replay model that has been developed and used in Division 2 will become more utilized in Division 3, related to more-universal instant replay using a coaches' challenge approach (except for targeting), much like we saw in the Centennial Conference this year. He understands the challenges, but he also feels that having two HD camera angles plus the normal web stream (basically at least three cameras) is sufficient to embrace the needs of instant replay. He is not in favor of a D1 type of replay at the lower levels because of the desire to not have constant game interruptions and more technological challenges at the lower levels than we see at D1 -- he stressed his support of a coaches' challenge system in our conversation multiple times. In The (D3FB) Huddle and I give thanks to Steve for his transparency, which is always on display in the CFO training videos he releases on YouTube. I always learn something when I watch his videos, and today was no different in our conversation.

The targeting foul against Zack Orr of NCC Football has been overturned, and he will be eligible to start in Saturday's #d3fb National Semifinal vs. Susquehanna Football at 3:30pm EST / 2:30pm CST. I spoke with Steve Shaw, the NCAA's National Coordinator of Officials, about the overturn this morning. Note that the provision in question is whether or not Springfield Football QB Drew Heenan qualified under the rules as a "defenseless player," as the following is one such definition in the NCAA Football Rulebook: "A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped." If a defenseless player is hit in the neck or head region by an opponent, then targeting is a proper call under the rules. Steve said: “We’re very clear that he's not defenseless until he is down. And if you go back and look at the video on the play…he's wrapped up and he's going down. And the contact is with [the] runner just as he's going to the ground. So he really has not transitioned to a defenseless player yet. You know, you can make the argument that, well, if he's wrapped up, he's defenseless and he can't really defend himself. But from a replay perspective, we needed a bright line that that was not a judgment, but a bright line. And that is, [he] has to be down, considered down before he's defenseless….He's just beginning to go down and be down. And so we wouldn't consider him down at the time that he's hit. And there's no crown of the helmet involved. The helmet is clearly to the side. And so, from a replay perspective, rules are very clear. You've got to be able to confirm all aspects of targeting for it to be targeting. You couldn't confirm that he was down and then hit. So we didn't give him defenseless status....And that's why the targeting was overturned.” Steve also taught me about something that is important. While regular replay reviews can come out as "confirmed," "overturned," or "stands" (which means that there is not conclusive evidence to overturn, but there isn't a full confirmation of the original call either), targeting calls do not have a "stands" option when they are reviewed. In other words, they are viewed anew and either every element necessary for targeting must be confirmed, or it is overturned. Think of it as being innocent until proven guilty in the review process for targeting. In this case, he was clear to underscore that the elements could have been argued to have existed, but it would have, at best, been a "call stands" decision, which is not sufficient to uphold a targeting call. Steve also expressed the hopes that the instant replay model that has been developed and used in Division 2 will become more utilized in Division 3, related to more-universal instant replay using a coaches' challenge approach (except for targeting), much like we saw in the Centennial Conference this year. He understands the challenges, but he also feels that having two HD camera angles plus the normal web stream (basically at least three cameras) is sufficient to embrace the needs of instant replay. He is not in favor of a D1 type of replay at the lower levels because of the desire to not have constant game interruptions and more technological challenges at the lower levels than we see at D1 -- he stressed his support of a coaches' challenge system in our conversation multiple times. In The (D3FB) Huddle and I give thanks to Steve for his transparency, which is always on display in the CFO training videos he releases on YouTube. I always learn something when I watch his videos, and today was no different in our conversation.

Frank Rossi

29,476 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Miami vs Ole Miss was a movie, but when i tell you that we had to beat the refs + Ole Miss, here is what I mean Why is Miami called for targeting while Ole Miss gets to walk away unscathed? and I don’t wanna hear anything about that end of the game no call on Miami

Miami vs Ole Miss was a movie, but when i tell you that we had to beat the refs + Ole Miss, here is what I mean Why is Miami called for targeting while Ole Miss gets to walk away unscathed? and I don’t wanna hear anything about that end of the game no call on Miami

Benchwarmer Sports

54,839 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Millie Odhiambo: There are no jobs, but we want to tax digital content. That is why Gen Z was on the streets rejecting the Finance Bill. The country must take ‘Super Tuesday’ as a wake-up call

Millie Odhiambo: There are no jobs, but we want to tax digital content. That is why Gen Z was on the streets rejecting the Finance Bill. The country must take ‘Super Tuesday’ as a wake-up call

Citizen TV Kenya

83,322 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🚨 JUST IN: The WNBA faces calls to SUSPEND DiJonai Carrington for the entire season after attacking Sophie Cunningham's face and neck "I don't want to hear 'that's a flagrant 2.' She should be SUSPENDED for the rest of the SEASON! This is INTENTIONAL." "This was TARGETING Sophie Cunningham." "Obviously, this was done because Sophie Cunningham stood up for women, saying that men shouldn't play against women in sports!" Joe Concha

🚨 JUST IN: The WNBA faces calls to SUSPEND DiJonai Carrington for the entire season after attacking Sophie Cunningham's face and neck "I don't want to hear 'that's a flagrant 2.' She should be SUSPENDED for the rest of the SEASON! This is INTENTIONAL." "This was TARGETING Sophie Cunningham." "Obviously, this was done because Sophie Cunningham stood up for women, saying that men shouldn't play against women in sports!" Joe Concha

Eric Daugherty

956,475 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Sophie Cunningham goes OFF on the WNBA & the refs for FAILING to PROTECT her Indiana Fevers teammate Caitlyn Clark after Alyssa Thomas hit her in the throat 😳👀 Sophie also speaks about her viral finger pointing at DeWanna Bonner, revealing that she did it to piss her off and it worked 🤣 “This time of sh*t happens every single game to her and the league & the refs do absolutely NOTHING about it… They’re definitely targeting her… If they’re really trying to make money, they should put people out there that people want to see, and they just don’t…”

Sophie Cunningham goes OFF on the WNBA & the refs for FAILING to PROTECT her Indiana Fevers teammate Caitlyn Clark after Alyssa Thomas hit her in the throat 😳👀 Sophie also speaks about her viral finger pointing at DeWanna Bonner, revealing that she did it to piss her off and it worked 🤣 “This time of sh*t happens every single game to her and the league & the refs do absolutely NOTHING about it… They’re definitely targeting her… If they’re really trying to make money, they should put people out there that people want to see, and they just don’t…”

Slime🐍

52,242 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨🇺🇸🇻🇪 "THERE ARE NO RULES UNDER THE TRUMP ADM - HE WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN" After Venezuela, is Iran next? Alex Christoforou says regime change is definitely on the table. And under Trump, nothing is off-limits. From kidnapping military leaders to striking peace negotiators and targeting scientists, Alex warns that all forms of covert warfare are now fair game. The message to Tehran? Pay attention. The era of rules is over, and Washington doesn’t care who’s watching. "Regime change is definitely on the table in Iran. The main message for the government in Iran is to take notice of what has happened in Venezuela. Countries around the world need to realize that the world we live in today, there are no rules. Decapitation strikes are definitely on the table. Kidnapping military leaders is on the table. As far as the Trump administration goes, there are no rules. They will do whatever they need to do to win." Alex Christoforou

🚨🇺🇸🇻🇪 "THERE ARE NO RULES UNDER THE TRUMP ADM - HE WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN" After Venezuela, is Iran next? Alex Christoforou says regime change is definitely on the table. And under Trump, nothing is off-limits. From kidnapping military leaders to striking peace negotiators and targeting scientists, Alex warns that all forms of covert warfare are now fair game. The message to Tehran? Pay attention. The era of rules is over, and Washington doesn’t care who’s watching. "Regime change is definitely on the table in Iran. The main message for the government in Iran is to take notice of what has happened in Venezuela. Countries around the world need to realize that the world we live in today, there are no rules. Decapitation strikes are definitely on the table. Kidnapping military leaders is on the table. As far as the Trump administration goes, there are no rules. They will do whatever they need to do to win." Alex Christoforou

Mario Nawfal

54,577 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

This poor girl… The medical examiner explained the condition of Athena Strand’s body as seen in the autopsy photos. She said that as soon as the body bag was opened, there was clear congestion from the neck up. Blood had pooled in her head and face, which made her skin appear much darker and more swollen. She then walked through the injuries across her forehead, eyes, nose, cheeks, lips, and neck. There were patterned abrasions that matched the textured surfaces inside the FedEx truck, along with bruising and trauma inside her mouth. Her conclusion was blunt. Athena died from a combination of blunt force trauma, smothering, and strangulation. And the injuries to her head and face happened while she was still alive.

This poor girl… The medical examiner explained the condition of Athena Strand’s body as seen in the autopsy photos. She said that as soon as the body bag was opened, there was clear congestion from the neck up. Blood had pooled in her head and face, which made her skin appear much darker and more swollen. She then walked through the injuries across her forehead, eyes, nose, cheeks, lips, and neck. There were patterned abrasions that matched the textured surfaces inside the FedEx truck, along with bruising and trauma inside her mouth. Her conclusion was blunt. Athena died from a combination of blunt force trauma, smothering, and strangulation. And the injuries to her head and face happened while she was still alive.

Jammles

56,721 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

This is what Arteta was saying about him in interviews whilst all this was going on. There needs to be a deep investigation into how & why this was covered up for so long — It’s no coincidence that two days after his contract expires, then he’s arrested. I pray for the victims.

This is what Arteta was saying about him in interviews whilst all this was going on. There needs to be a deep investigation into how & why this was covered up for so long — It’s no coincidence that two days after his contract expires, then he’s arrested. I pray for the victims.

MC

469,051 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr