[Husker] Big XII Suspends Eric Martin for Mizzou Game

[SteveG]

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR09.pdf

Page 50 [Rule 2: Definitions: Section 9; Article 1] defines a Flagrant
Personal Foul as a "rule infraction so extreme or deliberate that it places
an opponent in danger of catastrophic injury."  There is no foul for putting
inept players on the field so the no-call against OSU was the proper
no-call.

Page 135 discusses Flagrant Personal Fouls [FPF].

9.6
Article 1. If a player is disqualified from a game for a FPF, the conference
shall conduct a video review for possible sanctions b4 the next schd game.
Article 2. If a player is penalized but not disqualified, the conference
shall conduct a video review for possible sanctions b4 the next schd game.
Article 3. If a player is not penalized or disqualified, the conference may
impose sanctions b4 the next schd game.

~~~ 
In PART II:  Interpretations

Page 236 provides examples of "Initiating Contact/Targeting an Opponent" ...
A foul can be levied for launching and driving above the shoulder area with
helmet or shoulder.  The example further declares the foul against a
defenseless opponent above the shoulders.  It also provides an option for
Ejection for a Flagrant foul.

So, the hit on Martinez falls under 9-6-2 and we have to assume that the
video review occurred and the conference officials felt that the player's
actions did not justify additional sanctions.  Specifically, they must not
have saw the penalty as Flagrant.  I don't know if 9-6-1 or 9-6-2 have ever
been used to suspend a player for the following game.  I don't read anything
about intentions in the sections that I browsed.

Steve G


-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of
Dick Karre
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 10:40 PM
Cc: husker at tssi.com
Subject: Re: [Husker] Big XII Suspends Eric Martin for Mizzou Game

SteveG wrote:
  > However, it is a subjective call and the Big XII suspension is within
its
> boundaries [NCAA Football Rule 9-6-3] to impose sanctions.  

No one has brought this up, so I will. In that same game, an OSU lineman 
was flagged for hitting Martinez in the face mask with the crown of his 
helmet, but he was apparently not suspended. Why the different 
treatment? The blow was at least as intentional as Martin's. Is it 
because Martinez wasn't injured? Is it less dangerous when the blow 
comes from the front, rather than the side? Those both seem dubious, but 
I'm at a loss to understand. Thoughts?

-- 
Dick Karre
dkarre at comcast.net

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker