I think you need to check the rule book on this one tirk. I may be mistaken, but I believe this falls under defenseless player when it's an offensive play but there's nothing covering the hit after an INT.
You are better than this. Stop living up to your stereotype with technicality excuses when it suits you.
It was a dirty hit--much worse than the one against McCarron a series or two before that. I found it laughable (though not funny) later in the game when Danielson was talking about UGA's 7 penalties to Bama's one in the game.
Interesting article, there will be no suspension, the SEC officials are there to protect Alabama's season not quarterbacks on opposing teams.
Actually, since he's on the field and the whistle hadn't blown, he's involved in the play. INT, and while he's not actively pursuing the ball carrier he's no different than blocking any other player. The only difference here is he was the QB. It's a crack-back block. We'll see something instituted on it soon. But for today, well within the rules as far as I know.
Hang on now. I've said I would have flagged the play. It was unnecessary roughness. That said, it doesn't change the point it was within the rules. Did Dial see him as an open target and hit him because he was the QB? No doubt. Again, I'll ask. If the situation was reversed and you had Mingo doing the same what would your reaction be? It would be "it's within the rules." You'd say "shouldn't have happened" but you'd also admit it's within the rules. This is football.
Watch the .gif Stacey. He led with the shoulder but there was helmet contact. He was not leading with his helmet.
Mingo would have been called for being offsides, nullifying the interception. Then he would have been hit with a personal foul penalty as well. You can image how livid we would be. Toward Mingo or the refs? Who knows probably a split. This is reality.
