I absolutely said that after watching it live and knowing that they have done it before. After watching the film, I have no problem saying otherwise. You can't definitively tell if he was going for the ball or not from the film, so a no call for targeting is fine with me.Brutus87 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:03 amLol , I am not buying it. I wonder if you think the OHSAA should be notified of the hit? You know exactly what i am talking about. But moving on. Have a nice day.BobcatQB wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:33 amThe officials called targeting and a 15 yard penalty was enforced, so I don't understand why you're upset with me. I simply stated why the officials were made aware of the play prior to the game. Nowhere in my post did I say it was a cheap shot nor was I complaining about anything, just letting Teach know what the official said. Why so defensive? Relax. Good luck Sat.Brutus87 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:14 pm
So an uncalled penalty from a previous game should dictate that THIS play was a penalty and targeting? Makes zero sense. But one thing you are forgeting is the 30 blue team players on the field and ZERO bench players from the colts were on the field. So we trade one guy for your 20 ejections.
It was NOT a cheap shot. It was two guys going for the football. Also because the official announced it warranted an ejection doesn't mean he is correct.
You said it yourself it didn't look like it was targeting and I'm pretty sure past occurances have nothing to do with it.
Meadowbrook 62 Oak Hill 13