Mr. Pollard, what about the phantom "targeting" call against Lomax?

ChosenChildren

ChosenChildren

Well-Known Member
Jamie Pollard complained about a close call on the goal line at the end of the lst half of the OSU game. I was surprised they reversed the call, but not shocked. It was VERY CLOSE.

Pollard, the head clown, acts like there is a conspiracy against Iowa State.

But what about that targeting call against Lomax on Iowa State's winning drive against Iowa? Didn't that change the game? Was it REALLY targeting? Wasn't that call a BIG break for the Clowns??? A game-changing call that went THEIR WAY? Honestly, don't calls even out over time?????

You didn't see Barta complaining about that call or Ferentz going wacko on the sidelines.

Pollard and Rhoads are ABSOLUTE CLOWNS. I'm grateful they aren't at Iowa
 
ChosenChildren said:
Jamie Pollard complained about a close call on the goal line at the end of the lst half of the OSU game. I was surprised they reversed the call, but not shocked. It was VERY CLOSE.

Pollard, the head clown, acts like there is a conspiracy against Iowa State.

But what about that targeting call against Lomax on Iowa State's winning drive against Iowa? Didn't that change the game? Was it REALLY targeting? Wasn't that call a BIG break for the Clowns??? A game-changing call that went THEIR WAY? Honestly, don't calls even out over time?????

You didn't see Barta complaining about that call or Ferentz going wacko on the sidelines.

Pollard and Rhoads are ABSOLUTE CLOWNS. I'm grateful they aren't at Iowa
Click to expand...

Barta and Ferentz didn't get mad because it was the proper call...
 
Sparky said:
Barta and Ferentz didn't get mad because it was the proper call...
Click to expand...

Disagree! Just because the call didn't get overturned or that Lomax put himself in a position to where a ref could make that call, doesn't make it the right or proper call.
 
Eda said:
Disagree! Just because the call didn't get overturned or that Lomax put himself in a position to where a ref could make that call, doesn't make it the right or proper call.
Click to expand...

It was OBVIOUSLY the correct call.

Some people are so bad at understanding football that they really should consider finding something else to do with their weekends.
 
ChosenChildren said:
Jamie Pollard complained about a close call on the goal line at the end of the lst half of the OSU game. I was surprised they reversed the call, but not shocked. It was VERY CLOSE.

Pollard, the head clown, acts like there is a conspiracy against Iowa State.

But what about that targeting call against Lomax on Iowa State's winning drive against Iowa? Didn't that change the game? Was it REALLY targeting? Wasn't that call a BIG break for the Clowns??? A game-changing call that went THEIR WAY? Honestly, don't calls even out over time?????

You didn't see Barta complaining about that call or Ferentz going wacko on the sidelines.

Pollard and Rhoads are ABSOLUTE CLOWNS. I'm grateful they aren't at Iowa
Click to expand...


A VERY excellent post by Chosen. Without that questionable call........and I still call it dubious, at best, the
Hawkeyes are 5-0 and the cyclones are 0-5.
 
HawkIstate said:
A VERY excellent post by Chosen. Without that questionable call........and I still call it dubious, at best, the
Hawkeyes are 5-0 and the cyclones are 0-5.
Click to expand...

And that was Big12 officials at that game. Don't forget the questionable holding call on Jewell on 3rd down to allow ISU into field goal range to kick the game winner. So basically ISU has won 1 game, and it was because of the Big12 officials. ISU should be THANKING them, not ripping them.
 
HawkIstate said:
A VERY excellent post by Chosen. Without that questionable call........and I still call it dubious, at best, the
Hawkeyes are 5-0 and the cyclones are 0-5.
Click to expand...

I agree. Jarvis is fragile. You see many hits like that and they are not called for targetting.
 
After the clowns got the most bogus call in college football history called in their favor with the phantom targeting call they have no right to complain for the next 20 years about anything. When you add the bogus holding call to that they should be 0-5. Their program is a joke and only win on a fluke second field goal attempt set up by a series of bad calls. May they not win again for the rest of the year.
 
Wow, I haven't seen this much whining about a call since Saturday after the ISU game.

Iowa lost because they let one of the worst teams in college football kick their ***** all over the field. Not because of a CORRECT call. What a bunch of whiners.
 
In the Iowa-ISU game, the targeting call was a make-up call, by Big 12 refs, ordered by the Big 12 big wigs, so they could even the score for past screw jobs. Evening the score allowed them to fell comfortable about ordering future screw jobs.
 
Look back, people posted side by side videos of no calls that far more blatant than the Lomax play. In two of them the defending player left their feet and clearly initiated contact to the head and shoulder region. Yet there was no call. In the Lomax play both players were going for the ball and the contact was incidental and not caused by the defending player. We should be upset about this too because if it is not called the clowns have to punt, there is no clown td on the drive, and chances are Iowa wins.
 
Whether any of these calls is right or not, isu has become a loser by whining and crying about them publicly. It's a loser mentality that says whoa is me, everyone is out to get me. It gets you nowhere and makes your program look like a bunch of victims.

So, Pollard, Rhodes, clown fans everywhere, the whole country now thinks of you as poor victims. Congrats.
 
Sparky said:
Wow, I haven't seen this much whining about a call since Saturday after the ISU game.

Iowa lost because they let one of the worst teams in college football kick their ***** all over the field. Not because of a CORRECT call. What a bunch of whiners.
Click to expand...



i do agree with you and I never once blamed the officials for that loss, that is an ISU thing. Yet ISU crying about a call in a 17 pt loss, well you reap what you sow.....so I'm gonna point out calls that benefitted them by the very people they claim are out to get them.
 
Sparky said:
Wow, I haven't seen this much whining about a call since Saturday after the ISU game.

Iowa lost because they let one of the worst teams in college football kick their ***** all over the field. Not because of a CORRECT call. What a bunch of whiners.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is claiming that the game was lost due to two bad calls I'll include the holding call there). Although, an argument could be made-especially in a close game. The fact that it was against such a bad team certainly adds salt to the wound. You shouldn't be in the position against that terrible of a team.

The same thought could be applied to the hit. Lomax put himself in a position where the refs could call the hit (to which brings me to my previous point-just because they called the hit, doesn't make it a correct call). As I seen it, it appears Lomax hit West with his shoulder/bicep/elbow on the shoulder pad area. Lomax didn't launch or lead With the crown of his helmet. It also appeared Lomax turned as he was dropping down to make the hit, causing him to make contact a with his shoulder/bicep/elbow area (rather than head on). Because Mabin was making the tackle, Lomax had to go lower to make contact.

A targeting call has to be made on the defenseless opponent with contact initiated to the head/neck area or targeting with a hit by the crown of a helmet in any situation.

Lomax hit the receiver with his shoulder/bicep/elbow to the receivers shoulder. IMO, not a target.
 
Eda said:
I don't think anyone is claiming that the game was lost due to two bad calls I'll include the holding call there). Although, an argument could be made-especially in a close game. The fact that it was against such a bad team certainly adds salt to the wound. You shouldn't be in the position against that terrible of a team.

The same thought could be applied to the hit. Lomax put himself in a position where the refs could call the hit (to which brings me to my previous point-just because they called the hit, doesn't make it a correct call). As I seen it, it appears Lomax hit West with his shoulder/bicep/elbow on the shoulder pad area. Lomax didn't launch or lead With the crown of his helmet. It also appeared Lomax turned as he was dropping down to make the hit, causing him to make contact a with his shoulder/bicep/elbow area (rather than head on). Because Mabin was making the tackle, Lomax had to go lower to make contact.

A targeting call has to be made on the defenseless opponent with contact initiated to the head/neck area or targeting with a hit by the crown of a helmet in any situation.

Lomax hit the receiver with his shoulder/bicep/elbow to the receivers shoulder. IMO, not a target.
Click to expand...

So would you say that it was questionable? Meaning it could go both ways?
 
Sparky said:
So would you say that it was questionable? Meaning it could go both ways?
Click to expand...

On the field… It was a bang bang play, and I can see why the ref threw a flag. Whether you say the on the field call is questionable or not is up to you. (I will add, the delay it took the official to throw that flag after the play does present some doubt, as well)

But upon further review in the booth, it should have been overturned. After watching the replays, it seemed pretty obvious that it was not a target hit (contact was made on the shoulder of the reciever). That's what the replay official is supposed to look at, and ultimately uphold or change (so no I would not say it was a questionable call after looking at it in the booth)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top