Game Thread: Illinois at Michigan State

Status
Not open for further replies.
#227      

Twangers

T
Twangers
IlliniMC said:
That’s the thing tho. It was a bad personal foul call
Click to expand...

I would say iffy as opposed to bad but that’s not what’s got everyone riled up. People seem to believe the foul was added after the review. It was not.
 
#239      

Twangers

T
Twangers
Eh. That’s a weak call but a mental lapse on Kramer regardless. It’s day one stuff, if your hands slip outside they’re gonna throw flags.
 
#242      

sbillini

sbillini
st petersburg, fl
sbillini
Twangers said:
Sorta. There’s only one penalty, a personal foul but the added measure the NCAA placed on these plays as a matter of player safety was the designation of targeting. The way it gets called is as “Personal Foul-Targeting”, which further subjects the player to potential dismissal from the game. The targeting I believe is an auto review but regardless of what that review reveals, it’s still a personal foul on the field.
Click to expand...

Really? I don't believe that's the case. If a targeting is called and is then reversed on review, then there's typically no penalty on the field, correct? It's not like there's a guaranteed personal foul if a targeting is called and later reversed (I think).
 
#244      

Twangers

T
Twangers
sbillini said:
Really? I don't believe that's the case. If a targeting is called and is then reversed on review, then there's typically no penalty on the field, correct? It's not like there's a guaranteed personal foul if a targeting is called and later reversed.
Click to expand...

If the penalty is based around targeting. Take that last pick, if the penalty is only called because Nate hits him helmet to helmet and it’s reveiewed and seen otherwise, they’ll usually disallow the penalty.

So, we’re both right and wrong I guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.