How about the final play in the Badgers/Buckeyes game?

[GOUNUII]

I’m not sure what this means?

Appearances can be deceiving. Does that help?

GOUNUII

 

[stpaulcat]

Appearances can be deceiving. Does that help?

GOUNUII

Is that like "things in themselves are lying, and so are their images"?

 

[DaCat]

 

[Gladeskat]

View embedded media

A pinhead-shaped helmet? That must hurt!

 

[EvanstonCat]

Excuse me, maybe we have a different understanding of the expression that you used, “may have been”. That implies that you are casting doubt on whether it was a helmet to helmet hit. The video evidence leaves no doubt. It was a helmet a helmet hit and it is you who is demonstrating bias by not fully acknowledging that fact. No one in this thread said with certainty that it was intentional or malicious. That is certainly up for debate.

I used the word unnecessary because he could have accomplished his goal, preventing a TD, by pushing Coan out of bounds with a forceful push. Coanbwas running towards the end zone at an angle. A forceful push would have used the runner’s own momentum to get him out of bounds well before reaching the pile on. He instead chose to lead with his helmet and knock Coan’s lips off. Who knows why.

I saw a play in the NFL where a guy tried to push a player out of bounds and the guy stayed in and ran all the way for the TD. It was on a youtube list of "worst effort plays." I do not begrudge dOSU player for putting a big hit on Coan who wasn't sliding. That's what you get for not sliding. Maybe that's the problem with our players if they aren't told to knock the shit out of the other player and one difference between dOSU and NU. Especially if our QB is injured after the whistle by an opposing lineman (but I digress). I hate dOSU for what they are off the field, but we could learn a lot from the way they play (and coach) on the field.

 

[klemman]

Sometimes it is. And sometimes it’s not. But by rule and it’s application to the game, intent is irrelevant. Another example of a misleading title since the term universally connotes intent.

GOUNUII

Exactly!

 

[willycat]

Exactly!

HELMET to HELMET!!!

 

[Bwm57]

Appearances can be deceiving. Does that help?

GOUNUII

Not really, unless you are trying to say the video has been altered.

 

[klemman]

I never said it wasn't helmet to helmet. Again, from the start I said to me in real time from the angle that we saw it may have been helmet to helmet, but becasue it was at game's end we didn't see reverse angle replays in slow motion that would have confirmed it. If a flag was thrown at that moment by the official seen in the video standing a few feet away, I would have found it acceptable. The argument that Procter #41 should have been less aggressive because there are 2 defenders "behind him" and that Harrison's push was enough to keep Coan out of the end zone is as ridiculous as assuming that Coan would simply step out of bounds in the last play of the game.

Reckless physical play by the OSU defender, absolutely. Classless, it's an just a biased assumption without knowing intent.

If Corbi actually believes the definition of when I said, "May have been targeting..." was me actually saying that there "was no targeting", is.... disappointing, given the logic and understanding of the English language I expect from a Northwestern fan or alum. Then again, I'm just an illiterate OSU grad.

 

[willycat]

I never said it wasn't helmet to helmet. Again, from the start I said to me in real time from the angle that we saw it may have been helmet to helmet, but becasue it was at game's end we didn't see reverse angle replays in slow motion that would have confirmed it. If a flag was thrown at that moment by the official seen in the video standing a few feet away, I would have found it acceptable. The argument that Procter #41 should have been less aggressive because there are 2 defenders "behind him" and that Harrison's push was enough to keep Coan out of the end zone is as ridiculous as assuming that Coan would simply step out of bounds in the last play of the game.

Reckless physical play by the OSU defender, absolutely. Classless, it's an just a biased assumption without knowing intent.

If Corbi actually believes the definition of when I said, "May have been targeting..." was me actually saying that there "was no targeting", is.... disappointing, given the logic and understanding of the English language I expect from a Northwestern fan or alum. Then again, I'm just an illiterate OSU grad.

Well ok and since it was helmet to helmet, the ref who didn't throw a flag should also be criticized and possibly disciplined.

 

[corbi296]

I never said it wasn't helmet to helmet. Again, from the start I said to me in real time from the angle that we saw it may have been helmet to helmet, but becasue it was at game's end we didn't see reverse angle replays in slow motion that would have confirmed it. If a flag was thrown at that moment by the official seen in the video standing a few feet away, I would have found it acceptable. The argument that Procter #41 should have been less aggressive because there are 2 defenders "behind him" and that Harrison's push was enough to keep Coan out of the end zone is as ridiculous as assuming that Coan would simply step out of bounds in the last play of the game.

Reckless physical play by the OSU defender, absolutely. Classless, it's an just a biased assumption without knowing intent.

If Corbi actually believes the definition of when I said, "May have been targeting..." was me actually saying that there "was no targeting", is.... disappointing, given the logic and understanding of the English language I expect from a Northwestern fan or alum. Then again, I'm just an illiterate OSU grad.

I am not in the mood to drag this out but are you seriously trying to argue that using the expression “may have been” does not imply that the author is leaving open the possibility that it may have not been? Forget the hit in question, this is about logic and the English language.

 

[LeftyLarry]

Boys will be boys and OSU "Hires" a different level of Character Student-athlete than Wisconsin and NU does.
Coan is fine and even in a loss, we did knock OSU down a peg in the "Final Four " which Badgers weren't getting into even with a win and they gave us the Rose Bowl anyway.
That was probably our upside game even if we won.
Doubt they would have put us in over Oklahoma with the loss to LOVIE on our resume and doubt they would punch OSU out even if we did win, so no harm, no foul here.
Sorry you guys aren't bowling but at least your staff gets a chance to keep recruiting hard while everyone else is preparing.

 

[klemman]

I am not in the mood to drag this out but are you seriously trying to argue that using the expression “may have been” does not imply that the author is leaving open the possibility that it may have not been? Forget the hit in question, this is about logic and the English language.

it does imply that I leave the possibility open that it may not have happened as well as it may have happened, but you are claiming that I am stating an “absolute” it did not happen.

 

[corbi296]

it does imply that I leave the possibility open that it may not have happened as well as it may have happened, but you are claiming that I am stating an “absolute” it did not happen.

No, that’s not what I am saying. I am saying that you are delusional for thinking there is any doubt. The video is clear. The OSU player led with the crown of his helmet, launched himself into the tackle and made helmet to helmet contact. Any one of those things should have triggered a targeting penalty.