Adrian: injury | Page 3 | The Platinum Board

Adrian: injury

Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Welcome to tPB!

Welcome to The Platinum Board. We are a Nebraska Husker news source and fan community.

Sign Up Now!
  • Welcome to The Platinum Board! We are a Nebraska Cornhuskers news source and community. Please click "Log In" or "Register" above to gain access to the forums.

Adrian: injury

I edited my post to clarify a bit more. The crown has to be lowered, basically looking straight at the ground. So if this defender lowers his contact point and body angle and helmet angle are the same, to let's say the stomach area, would you still want targeting by leading with the crown of the helmet, or do you see it as targeting because his crown contacted AM's helmet?

I see it as targeting because he's using the crown of his helmet to initiate the contact. I guess I thought that was the definition of it regardless of where the player was hit.
 
I see it as targeting because he's using the crown of his helmet to initiate the contact. I guess I thought that was the definition of it regardless of where the player was hit.
I can see both sides of the targeting argument, but what's inexcusable is the TV broadcast not even replaying the hit until after the commercial break (and after the next play had been run, iirc) and the replay officials not even taking a look at it. we see much more questionable hits get reviewed every week, but somehow this one doesn't even warrant a second look

I swear half of targeting calls only get reviewed if the broadcast shows the replay and applies some pressure. I think the replay officials 2 priorities are (in order) to avoid embarrassing themselves, and then also maybe get the call right
 
I can see both sides of the targeting argument, but what's inexcusable is the TV broadcast not even replaying the hit until after the commercial break (and after the next play had been run, iirc) and the replay officials not even taking a look at it. we see much more questionable hits get reviewed every week, but somehow this one doesn't even warrant a second look

I swear half of targeting calls only get reviewed if the broadcast shows the replay and applies some pressure. I think the replay officials 2 priorities are (in order) to avoid embarrassing themselves, and then also maybe get the call right
Guarantee they looked at it. There was the injury timeout so they didn't have to stop the game to do so.
 
Careful last time something came from NCIU they told me to suck waterboys dick
48164973.jpg
 
Are we sure he didn't break it today from sucking all that dick at trying to read coverages?
 
Guarantee they looked at it. There was the injury timeout so they didn't have to stop the game to do so.
does the replay booth have independent access to all the camera angles, or are they still reliant on the broadcast to show the angles? (which they can then rewind as needed)
 
I couldn't even find anything online that specified. I know in the early days of CFB replay it was just a basic DVR and TV set up where they watched the broadcast and were dependent on them to show the angles. I'd like to think it's improved since then but nothing would surprise me at this point
 
does the replay booth have independent access to all the camera angles, or are they still reliant on the broadcast to show the angles? (which they can then rewind as needed)

Yes, they have their own feed of anywhere from 7 to 12+ angles depending on the stadium. They control everything in their booth completely separate from broadcast.

Furthermore, I asked a BIG replay official, yes they reviewed it and no targeting.
 
Back
Top