NFT: Rules in any of the major sports which make no sense to you

you can block 1st, 2nd, or 3rd base of a guy sliding in, but not home.

1 & 10 at your own 2 yard line and the offense commits a hold at the line of scrimmage. Result, 1 & 11 at the 1 yard line. Why should the O get the benefit of the half the distance on both the yardage lost and the line to gain? It should become 1st and 20 at the 1 yard line.

In comment 13972401 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

1 & 10 at your own 2 yard line and the offense commits a hold at the line of scrimmage. Result, 1 & 11 at the 1 yard line. Why should the O get the benefit of the half the distance on both the yardage lost and the line to gain? It should become 1st and 20 at the 1 yard line.

Agreed.

Or, if they can't mark off the full amount - loss of down. 2nd and 11.

especially for personal foul penalties
why not enforce it at the 1 yard line?

also for goaline plays, the defense can launch themselves into the backfield to stop a run play and the only penalty is 1/2 the distance? they can try to time it and hope the refs miss if they are offsides.

with the recent clarifications, defining a catch in the NFL is some of the most confusing shit out there, including the language of "surviving the ground".

- Why can't you goaltend a FG attempt?
- Muffed balls cannot be advanced

In NHL - when they call a penalty shot, if it is unsuccessful, why is the penalized player not sent to the box?

Baseball - On passed ball third strikes, you can't try to go to first if the base was occupied.

just bug me:
-the rule where the offense fumbles the ball through the end zone and out of bounds, the defense gets the ball on the 20. WTF?
-the mere existence of extra point or conversions of any kind in football. You score a TD, that should be the end of it. Why do you need this subsequent play?
-sometimes I think you should be able to goaltend in the NBA once the ball hits the rim.
-Randomly, I'd love to see what hockey would look like without offsides.
-not having an official stadium clock in soccer tied into the ref's clock
-not posting judge's scores round by round in boxing

In comment 13972415 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

with the recent clarifications, defining a catch in the NFL is some of the most confusing shit out there, including the language of "surviving the ground". - Why can't you goaltend a FG attempt? - Muffed balls cannot be advanced In NHL - when they call a penalty shot, if it is unsuccessful, why is the penalized player not sent to the box? Baseball - On passed ball third strikes, you can't try to go to first if the base was occupied.

Baseball one makes sense. Catcher could just drop the 3rd strike on purpose and get a double play. Basically it exists for the same reason as the infield fly rule.

good point.

would be terrible. Just have your best offensive player cherry picking in the other team's zone the whole game.

What I would like to see with soccer is no offside when the ball is in the penalty area. That might make things interesting.

Offensive 3-second lane violation.

Soccer: offside

Icing.
The power play:go ahead and "ice" the puck; no face off in your zone.
Rewarding the penalized team by allowing them to dump the puck as often as they can, letting the clock run down, taking action away from the penalized teams goalie.
If you have a great penalty kill D, slash/hook away.

In comment 13972429 Gman11 said:

Quote:

would be terrible. Just have your best offensive player cherry picking in the other team's zone the whole game.

if that were an effective strategy, teams would already be parking a player at the opposing blue line.

In comment 13972430 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

Offensive 3-second lane violation. Soccer: offside

Both of those issues stop goal hanging, in both sports. If you didn't have those, you would literally have guys sitting outside the goal/basket and wait for a ball to come to them.

In comment 13972415 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

In NHL - when they call a penalty shot, if it is unsuccessful, why is the penalized player not sent to the box?

Or give the team the option of declining the penalty shot and taking the 2:00.

In comment 13972432 old man said:

Quote:

Icing. The power play:go ahead and "ice" the puck; no face off in your zone. Rewarding the penalized team by allowing them to dump the puck as often as they can, letting the clock run down, taking action away from the penalized teams goalie. If you have a great penalty kill D, slash/hook away.

agree that giving a penalized team the ability to do something you can't do during normal game conditions is dumb. Allowing shorthanded teams to ice the puck also lets them change lines.

again in the NBA.

NFL catches. I still have no idea what constitutes a catch. And I don't think I ever will.

In comment 13972415 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

- Why can't you goaltend a FG attempt?

It wouldnt take any type of special skill for an NBA center to block almost any shot.

In comment 13972455 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

In comment 13972415 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: - Why can't you goaltend a FG attempt? It wouldnt take any type of special skill for an NBA center to block almost any shot.

He was talking about a football FG, not a basketball one.

In comment 13972414 JoeBDieHard said:

Quote:

they can try to time it and hope the refs miss if they are offsides.

I don't have any problem with this.

1) a smart defense is always trying to get into the backfield as quick as possible without getting flagged.

2) Although the defensive flag does not result in significant yardage for the offense, it does give the Offense an extra down. That is an extra chance to move the ball just 1 or two yards into the endzone. Also, the penalty is optional for the offense... so if the offensive play goes wrong and fails to get the score or goes disastrously (turnover), that extra down for the offense is huge.

I was talking about in the NFL.

Seems strange that you can block the ball at the LOS, but can't as it is getting to the uprights.

In comment 13972436 Matt in SGS said:

Quote:

In comment 13972430 Capt. Don said: Quote: Offensive 3-second lane violation. Soccer: offside Both of those issues stop goal hanging, in both sports. If you didn't have those, you would literally have guys sitting outside the goal/basket and wait for a ball to come to them.

But the defense can put someone on them. So advantage nullified.

I can speak to basketball more so than soccer. This just penalizes bigger stronger players which I dont get. We dont penalize faster players for being fast.

As for soccer, it would open the game up more. Ok, if you want to cherry pick and spread your team out then you are just loosening up your defense.

Drives me nuts when a team gets a 1 goal lead in the 2nd half and just packs in 10 players defensively.

the full 2 minutes served. A goal didn't end it back then. I remember my dad saying it was the Rocket Richard era Cnandiens that led to the change to a goal ending the PP on a mnor penalty.

I don't like the "trapeziod" rule either. It punishes a skill.

The NFL is the KING of contradictory, overly complex rules.

In comment 13972457 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

In comment 13972455 Capt. Don said: Quote: In comment 13972415 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: - Why can't you goaltend a FG attempt? It wouldnt take any type of special skill for an NBA center to block almost any shot. He was talking about a football FG, not a basketball one.

Ahhh, I see.

THAT would take considerable talent and would add a little fun to a last second 55 yard field goal attempt.

is the one mentioned so far that I agree with the most. Just idiotic.

The extra-point made sense in the old days of low scoring regulation time-only games when kickers weren't so great. It was an effective tie-breaker. No longer needed today despite Roger's lame-o efforts to re-invigorate it. Probably still exists only for TV purposes. They can sneak in a network promo or even a full blown commercial if needed.

at the end of SB 46. In late game situations, it can be smart for the defense to break a rule and take a flag so that time runs off the clock. In the Giants' case, they had too many men on the field. The elapsed time was far more valuable to the Giants then the 5 yards the Pats gained via the flag - or the extra down. Maybe give the offense the opportunity to decline the penalty and simply replay the down with the time put back on the clock?

Oh, that's not actually a rule?

deciding a team game with a one-on-one shootout is totally ridiculous. I didn't think a tie was so awful that they had to come up with this arbitrary way to decide a winner. Why not just flip a coin?

Let's determine the winner of this tie game by seeing which goalie randomly guesses right more.

Seems like most of the ones they used to wave off a goal had zero effect on the play.

In comment 13972487 Coach Red Beaulieu said:

Quote:

Let's determine the winner of this tie game by seeing which goalie randomly guesses right more.

Totally agree. It would be like deciding basketball games with halfcourt shots.

Let's take an element of the game that almost never happens and have it decide games.

Commit a personal foul on a play your team picks up a first down. Ball goes back 15 yards, but it's still first and 10 instead of first and 25. A team with the lead could exploit this to have a 30 minute drive and run out the clock.

… should give a choice of having a penalty shot or power play

No alternating possession. One player with one skill can and does dominate a game.

Basketball used to have a tip after every score. If you had a really tall player with no discernible basketball skill you had a huge advantage.

In comment 13972514 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

In comment 13972487 Coach Red Beaulieu said: Quote: Let's determine the winner of this tie game by seeing which goalie randomly guesses right more. Totally agree. It would be like deciding basketball games with halfcourt shots. Let's take an element of the game that almost never happens and have it decide games.

Let's play a 120 minute game with goals hard to come by and then settle it with new game where there's like 9 goals in about 5 minutes.

It's fine if the penalties are the same value, but if you have encroachment by the defense and holding by the offense, why not penalize the offense the difference of the 2 penalties?

In comment 13972432 old man said:

Quote:

Icing. The power play:go ahead and "ice" the puck; no face off in your zone. Rewarding the penalized team by allowing them to dump the puck as often as they can, letting the clock run down, taking action away from the penalized teams goalie. If you have a great penalty kill D, slash/hook away.

Is this serious? You know the short handed team has less players on the ice. I'd say that's a significant disadvantage.

Interestingly though in youth hockey (mites, squirts and peewees and even bantams I think) they no longer allow a short handed team to ice the puck. It's considered icing. The reason though is not what you were getting at, it's a USA Hockey influenced rule to encourage the youngsters to skate the puck more and find creative ways to get the puck out of the zone while short-handed.

Takes some getting used to.

allowing spectators to be referees sitting at home finding mistakes on tv

Why the aversion to ties?

the FG blocking thing (in football.) You can block it on the way up but not on the way down? How does that make sense, it's not like in basketball? As long as the players are not using the goalpost or each other to lift themselves up in any way, why would it be a problem? It wouldn't happen too often anyway but could make for an exciting play, like when an outfielder steals a home run.

tried to block a FG on it's way down? that would be some ridiculous athleticism and timing.

It seems like players like Tony Gonzalez or Jimmy Graham barely make it high enough to spike the football over the goal post.

to be able to time a jump right and swat a moving football out of the air should be allowed. I can see them saying you can't use the goal post as leverage, but if you can jump up and swat the FG away you should be able to.

Has this happened and resulted in something?

If a players shoots on goal, misses, and the ball goes out of bounds his team can keep the ball if a teammate is closer to the line where the ball went out.

Why is the hell do they reward a poor result?

You shot, you missed, the ball went out of bounds. The other team gets the ball. I can't for the life of me figure out why this can't be applied...

So redickyouless.

runner can be down without being contacted...stupid.
Get up and keep running.

As I understand, this was to encourage fast breaks & open court plays. Instead, it leads to a required stoppage and review at every near fast break foul. Also, IMO it's a great strategy to foul and force FTs at worst

Also WTF is a clear path foul penalized LITERALLY the same as a flagrant 1 (non-DQ)?

Defensive 3 seconds. It kinda means you still can't play zone. And D is already hard enough without every rule leaning to O & scoring

As mentioned above soccer offsides. As a bball guy, it's on you to play D. I get the field is huge but if you're on D you should know where the O is, especially w/ dedicated D positions

(and some have been mentioned)

1. shootouts. Some high profile important games have been decided by shootouts and it's a shame (soccer and INTL hockey). players, coaches, fans, etc. have so much invested in their teams play until a winner (like NHL playoffs).

2. replay in sports. I believe we all should always want the correct outcome. But sports are played by humans and officiated by humans. If you can be sure the officials are not corrupt, a missed call in a real time fast game is something you need to accept. I'm willing to live and die by those decisions.

2a. In the NFL if you are going to allow replay, why just allow replay for a catch or a first down, but not something sometimes so much more impactful like pass interference or the aforementioned defensive holding, or even offensive holding, Boothe on Wilfork in SBXLVI could have been game changing. and there's a ton of phantom PI calls. No idea why a catch is challengeable or a 1 yard run to get a 1st down, but not a 40 yard PI call.

Get rid of all replay or find a way to make the impactful decisions get corrected. All of them.

3. baseball warnings. this is unfair. Team A hits player on team B and if there has been any history both benches get warned. Why warn both benches? One team's pitcher hit the other team's player, how is that fair to warn both?

4. hockey faceoffs. drop the puck. stop kicking players out for not lining up right. Make it a penalty or clarify the rule, it's killing me. Every face off one center is kicked out.

5. Delay of game (over the glass) in hockey. I think this should be a judgement call, so many times a defenseman hits a bouncing puck and there is clearly no intent, but it's a black and white rule when it shouldn't be.

I'm sure there is more.

Even b4 all the tech we had, it drives me insane it taken THIS long to have meaningful camera angles on down the relevant lines (how many times they don't have any good angles as if that should fly?)

I know MLB traditionalists hate it but IMO a consistent strike zone would simply follow the actual rules of the game vs the nonsense random strike zones. And if you KNOW someone is framing a pitch, THEN STILL CALL IT RIGHT DUMBASS. I get how it influences, but that's why you're paid to judge what's accurate. So they should just have an electronic strike zone

Actually I'm sure no one watches cricket, but their DRS review is awesome. The rules already lend themselves to it, but they use on the line camera angles, a mic / audio signal spectrum to help decide if the ball hits the bat, then a tracking model to show the ball trajectory (to see if it hits the stumps) - much like tennis' line review. Really cool

Automatic first down ? Hate it

I get we can't just allow every play to be reviewed. But once we've initiated a legal review, they should be able to review ALL aspects of the play. Obviously this can be difficult in games with a ton of infractions (eg you can always call something on the OL), but it's should be all encompassing

In comment 13972356 dep026 said:

Quote:

you can block 1st, 2nd, or 3rd base of a guy sliding in, but not home.

You can't really block those bases either.

It must be as objectively enforceable as possible, or just not have the rule if you don't follow it. Like the slide rule in baseball b4 the recent change - if it wasn't enforced, what was it in there for?

Tuck rule. How is it a subjective amount of time when the tuck ends? When I saw it live I assumed it's when his 2nd hand touches the ball again

Or how they talk about "an element of time." What element? Either call out the EXACT amount of time or use something else. And if it's fractions of a second, obviously a human can't judge so that has to be considered

Basically you can't introduce terminology and leave it undefined. "Element of time" "football move" (esp in the endzone). It's mindnumbingly stupid given all the money & smarts & highly educated resources in billion dollar industry

I can understand the leagues intent here, with the 5 yard defensive holding as well as spot foul PI. They don't want guys being dragged down all over the field and defenses swallowing the penalty to live another day. Spot fouls and automatic firsts they think greatly discourage this stuff

But overall they do need to easy up on the PI. If NE is ever 3rd and 8 or more all Brady does is throw the ball out of bounds 40 yards down the left sideline, yell at the refs, and whaddaya you know pass interference and it's 1st and goal NE. Give the defenders a damn chance. Some handfighting and tugging here and there is fine

1) NFL catch rules. I still don't understand them and what I do understand I don't agree with.

2) As the OP mentioned, I always wondered about the NBA rule allowing a team to advance the ball to half-court after a time out. I never liked it and I never understood why.

3) As mentioned, icing waived off on a PK

4) NBA - Defensive 3 seconds

In comment 13972642 bw in dc said:

Quote:

If a players shoots on goal, misses, and the ball goes out of bounds his team can keep the ball if a teammate is closer to the line where the ball went out. Why is the hell do they reward a poor result? You shot, you missed, the ball went out of bounds. The other team gets the ball. I can't for the life of me figure out why this can't be applied...

I like the rule and you coach within it. It encourages shot taking and you have to allot a player to be near the end line so you can shoot again. Shoot and a miss the d gets it regardless and runs the length of the field the refs and the midfielders would be dead and the game would be more of a track meet.

While it's not a in game rule I'd allow domed teams to decide themselves when they want the roof open. If it's 90 degrees week 1, Minnesota can close the roof and put the AC on, but if the Pack is coming in week 16 and snow is forecast, let them keep it open if they'd like

but I don't like Hall of Fame rules that you need to be out of the game for X number of years.

If a player or coach is deemed - by whatever standard - to be worthy of HoF consideration, then they should be added to the list.

Look at coaching in the NFL. These guys can coach for a long time, and sometimes into the twilight of their lives.

Let's use Belichick as an example (you can use Coughlin too). He is 66. He may coach until he's 70. Then he'll have to wait until he's 75 for the call. There is a lot that can go wrong when you are that age. I'd hate for his family and him, in this example, to miss that special moment because of some silly rule to let a person's work marinate for a while with the voters.

Utter bullsh-t...

One thing in baseball that sort of bugs me (though will never be changed) is when a runner steals a base (or slides in safely for any reason) but ends up overshooting the back unintentionally. The tag is kept on him and he's out and yes it's the right call, but halting your momentum there is really really difficult and penalizes guys for being fast. I wouldn't mind seeing the play called dead as soon as the tag is beat. If you run past the bag that's a different story. But sliding past the bag shouldn't be penalized

The game would look completely different without the offsides rule. If not for the offsides rule the game would be more spread out and disjointed.

3-5 guys can be subbed a game? What is this 1950?

not exactly a rule but foot faults - how on earth can a judge see a quarter inch toe ahead from 50 ft away?

In comment 13972495 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Seems like most of the ones they used to wave off a goal had zero effect on the play.

Yeah this one kills me. Especially when a team has a strong push in the offensive zone and scores. Wait a minute, he was off sides by a fraction of a skate blade 45 seconds earlier and that had absolutely no impact on the goal itself.

I do agree if it is a rush and they score on the ensuing play.

In comment 13972792 oghwga said:

Quote:

I like the rule and you coach within it. It encourages shot taking and you have to allot a player to be near the end line so you can shoot again. Shoot and a miss the d gets it regardless and runs the length of the field the refs and the midfielders would be dead and the game would be more of a track meet.

Interesting.

On the other hand, you play really good, tight D. And force a player into a bad shot that flies way off goal and out of bounds. The reward? Too bad, work hard and play defense again because what you did the first time essentially means nothing...

how to make the last 2 minutes of a close NBA not last for 30 minutes?!

Defensive pass interference penalties in the NFL should not result is an automatic first down. Should be a 15 yard penalty.

There should be no roughing the passer penalty. The same rules that apply to the ability to hit a player should apply. Why a special rule for quarterbacks... are they more vulnerable than a downfield receiver catching a rainbow pass?

Why in God's name is there a shoot-out in the NHL. Play 5 minute OT periods and remove a skater until a goal is scored.

be wrong, but I think in the 50's you weren't allowed any subs.

Quote:

Pro soccer sub rule giantsFC : 12:28 pm : link : reply 3-5 guys can be subbed a game? What is this 1950?

I'm not much of a soccer historian, so I don't know when it changed, but I believe the rule used to be there were no subs. If there was an injury, you played a man down.

One of the best things (IMO) about soccer is the severity of it. If you make a mistake in your lineup, or where you commit a foul, the cost can be significant.

The 2014 Champions League final is a good example. Atletico Madrid decided to start their star striker Diego Costa despite him not being fully recovered from a hamstring injury. Sure enough he was forced to come off after 8 minutes. Considering Real Madrid scored to make it 1-1 late in injury time, you could make a case that the decision to start Costa cost Atletico the Champions League.

In comment 13972803 fanofthejets said:

Quote:

One thing in baseball that sort of bugs me (though will never be changed) is when a runner steals a base (or slides in safely for any reason) but ends up overshooting the back unintentionally. The tag is kept on him and he's out and yes it's the right call, but halting your momentum there is really really difficult and penalizes guys for being fast. I wouldn't mind seeing the play called dead as soon as the tag is beat. If you run past the bag that's a different story. But sliding past the bag shouldn't be penalized

yes it should. you should not be rewarded for mistiming your slide.

In comment 13972851 BamaBlue said:

Quote:

how to make the last 2 minutes of a close NBA not last for 30 minutes?!

This would be easy to change if they wanted to. Limit the number of timeouts or make them 20-second only in the last 2 minutes. A good coach shouldn't have to diagram something for his team - just call out a play like they do in football.

In comment 13972487 Coach Red Beaulieu said:

Quote:

Let's determine the winner of this tie game by seeing which goalie randomly guesses right more.

This 100%

not so much a rule, but that the field dimensions can change in every park

In comment 13972356 dep026 said:

Quote:

you can block 1st, 2nd, or 3rd base of a guy sliding in, but not home.

I don't think that's the rule. You can't obstruct the baserunner at any base unless you have the ball. Notice that on plays at third the 3rd baseman never sets up in front of the bag, always behind the bag. Once you have the ball you can block the runner at any base.

In comment 13972401 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

1 & 10 at your own 2 yard line and the offense commits a hold at the line of scrimmage. Result, 1 & 11 at the 1 yard line. Why should the O get the benefit of the half the distance on both the yardage lost and the line to gain? It should become 1st and 20 at the 1 yard line.

I think that would be a good rule change.

In comment 13972444 gtt350 said:

Quote:

again in the NBA.

Seriously.

In comment 13972650 Dnew15 said:

Quote:

runner can be down without being contacted...stupid. Get up and keep running.

I think that's considered a safety thing, so guys don't get hit while they're on the ground. But I could be wrong.

can't believe no-one has mentioned the number one rule that makes no sense in any sport

the fact that MLB has a designated hitter rule in ONE league
and doesn't have it in the other league

no other sport in the world plays with two different set of rules

it is so absurd

does have some different rules but that is what makes it unique IMO. It's a possession-based game. The newer use of shot clocks has lessened that somewhat but defenses still have to work hard to get the ball. Goaltending and ground balls are very important. I do think the faceoff has become a little too specialized and might impact the outcome more than originally intended but I'm not sure alternating possession is the right way to go either.

In comment 13973078 giantfan2000 said:

Quote:

can't believe no-one has mentioned the number one rule that makes no sense in any sport the fact that MLB has a designated hitter rule in ONE league and doesn't have it in the other league no other sport in the world plays with two different set of rules it is so absurd

The DH is impure. It's an abomination.

It is incredible how much that shot has altered the state of the game. And at all levels. My son played in a very competitive AAU league and there were teams that took well over 70% threes.

Basically, first one who gets the ball, dribbles up then... (1) fakes a drive, steps back, shoots the three, (2) jump shot, shoot the three, or (3) get the high screen, shoot the three. Or once in a while swing it around and then launch the three.

All else fails, drive for the lay-up.

Repeat.

Basketball is a beautiful game when played at a level involving all five players. I'm not sure I find this version of the game a great evolving...

In comment 13973169 bw in dc said:

Quote:

It is incredible how much that shot has altered the state of the game. And at all levels. My son played in a very competitive AAU league and there were teams that took well over 70% threes. Basically, first one who gets the ball, dribbles up then... (1) fakes a drive, steps back, shoots the three, (2) jump shot, shoot the three, or (3) get the high screen, shoot the three. Or once in a while swing it around and then launch the three. All else fails, drive for the lay-up. Repeat. Basketball is a beautiful game when played at a level involving all five players. I'm not sure I find this version of the game a great evolving...

Agreed. It's not fun to play that way either.

In comment 13972640 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

tried to block a FG on it's way down? that would be some ridiculous athleticism and timing. It seems like players like Tony Gonzalez or Jimmy Graham barely make it high enough to spike the football over the goal post. to be able to time a jump right and swat a moving football out of the air should be allowed. I can see them saying you can't use the goal post as leverage, but if you can jump up and swat the FG away you should be able to. Has this happened and resulted in something?

I think it is legal. I've seen it happen.

In comment 13972799 bw in dc said:

Quote:

but I don't like Hall of Fame rules that you need to be out of the game for X number of years. If a player or coach is deemed - by whatever standard - to be worthy of HoF consideration, then they should be added to the list. Look at coaching in the NFL. These guys can coach for a long time, and sometimes into the twilight of their lives. Let's use Belichick as an example (you can use Coughlin too). He is 66. He may coach until he's 70. Then he'll have to wait until he's 75 for the call. There is a lot that can go wrong when you are that age. I'd hate for his family and him, in this example, to miss that special moment because of some silly rule to let a person's work marinate for a while with the voters. Utter bullsh-t...

Well, since you opened that Pandora's box, I don't like a lot of the unwritten rules about the HOF voting, and some of the written ones.On the formal side, I don't like setting a limit to the number of guys that can be elected in a given year. If enough guys get the votes in a given year, why not induct them all?

On the informal side, I don't like this whole first ballot concept. A guy, in your estimation as a voter, is either worthy of the HOF or he isn't,.

In comment 13973186 Matt M. said:

Quote:

In comment 13973169 bw in dc said: Quote: It is incredible how much that shot has altered the state of the game. And at all levels. My son played in a very competitive AAU league and there were teams that took well over 70% threes. Basically, first one who gets the ball, dribbles up then... (1) fakes a drive, steps back, shoots the three, (2) jump shot, shoot the three, or (3) get the high screen, shoot the three. Or once in a while swing it around and then launch the three. All else fails, drive for the lay-up. Repeat. Basketball is a beautiful game when played at a level involving all five players. I'm not sure I find this version of the game a great evolving... Agreed. It's not fun to play that way either.

That's what I get for teaching him what I was taught - dribble without carrying, take only two steps, moving without the ball, lots of cutting, looking to make the pass first, etc.

Never thought shooting was a form of passing, carrying was the new way to advance, and the Euro-step + 2 was the optimal way to move through lane... ;)

In comment 13972642 bw in dc said:

Quote:

If a players shoots on goal, misses, and the ball goes out of bounds his team can keep the ball if a teammate is closer to the line where the ball went out. Why is the hell do they reward a poor result? You shot, you missed, the ball went out of bounds. The other team gets the ball. I can't for the life of me figure out why this can't be applied...

My son played four years of Lacrosse in HS. There are so many rules in that game that it was hard to keep up.

having to hit out of a divot in the fairway. Called "run of the green" by USGA and R&A but really "tough shit" in common talk. Not your fault somebody didn't fix it or the sand washed out. You should get a free drop within a foot of the divot.

Agree on a 5 yard hold being an automatic 1st down.

a football move for a catch to be a catch. It was fine when it was "two feet down, with possession/control of the ball"

In comment 13973210 Beer Man said:

Quote:

In comment 13972642 bw in dc said: Quote: If a players shoots on goal, misses, and the ball goes out of bounds his team can keep the ball if a teammate is closer to the line where the ball went out. Why is the hell do they reward a poor result? You shot, you missed, the ball went out of bounds. The other team gets the ball. I can't for the life of me figure out why this can't be applied... My son played four years of Lacrosse in HS. There are so many rules in that game that it was hard to keep up.

My daughter plays Lax and is going to play D1. And they don't wear any equipment - except a mouth piece - and their game is really over-regulated for safety.

It's a little better at the club level because the refs let them play, but at the HS level the game just gets bogged down with whistle after whistle. It's really unbearable. And I live in northern Virginia where Lax is a premier sport...

KC under Hank Stram tried it with Morris Stroud. He was a 6'10" tight end who stood under the post. The FG was good as he just missed it.

In comment 13973078 giantfan2000 said:

Quote:

can't believe no-one has mentioned the number one rule that makes no sense in any sport the fact that MLB has a designated hitter rule in ONE league and doesn't have it in the other league no other sport in the world plays with two different set of rules it is so absurd

Totally agree. IMO the MLB is the worst in this context. 2 sets of rules, no salary cap, continued reliance on humans vs digital reffing due to the enormous consistency (players don't care which way you sway, just that you call it consistently), different sized fields and on and on. And yes, I do like the actual game of baseball a lot

Mentioned this b4, but Dick Bavetta, now retired & well regarded NBA ref spoke at a bball camp I attended in Albany 20+ yrs ago. "People don't come to see MJ foul out. They come to see him score 50pts. And we're a big part of making that happen." To a room full of Knick fans - we of the repeated close playoff losses to the Bulls

Then a diatribe how "PT" means "Pine Time" to refs. "We decide who plays, not your coaches." Even a half-assed PR team would tell him to NEVER say this

A ref's job is to be unbiased, just like the rules are meant to level the playing field in order to find out who's best. It's like a science experiment and the rules & refs are the control. Of course if they are biased or just shit, what the hell did we actually learn?

a few years back they tried-out using technology to "aid" umps in ball and strike calls but it was universally hated. I remember Tom Glavine using it as an excuse for pitching poorly. I'm sure the technology has improved since then.

In comment 13973191 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 13972640 pjcas18 said: Quote: tried to block a FG on it's way down? that would be some ridiculous athleticism and timing. It seems like players like Tony Gonzalez or Jimmy Graham barely make it high enough to spike the football over the goal post. to be able to time a jump right and swat a moving football out of the air should be allowed. I can see them saying you can't use the goal post as leverage, but if you can jump up and swat the FG away you should be able to. Has this happened and resulted in something? I think it is legal. I've seen it happen.

Not legal:

[quote] Goaltending is against the rules in football, not just basketball: A player who jumps up and touches a ball as it is about to go through the goal posts in an attempt to block a field goal is flagged for goaltending, a 15-yard penalty. This came up when 49ers kicker David Akers hit the crossbar with his record-tying 63-yard field goal, and Packers receiver Randall Cobb jumped up and just missed knocking the ball away.
ghost of mikan - ( New Window )

could also be a way to speed up play, which most agree needs to happen. It would be subtle but no more huffing and puffing, stepping out of the box or off of the rubber, questions for the umpire, etc. Everyone would just have to accept the calls because you can't yell a machine. There could be complaints after the fact but that is when the game is already over.

In comment 13973194 Matt M. said:

Quote:

In comment 13972799 bw in dc said: Quote: but I don't like Hall of Fame rules that you need to be out of the game for X number of years. If a player or coach is deemed - by whatever standard - to be worthy of HoF consideration, then they should be added to the list. Look at coaching in the NFL. These guys can coach for a long time, and sometimes into the twilight of their lives. Let's use Belichick as an example (you can use Coughlin too). He is 66. He may coach until he's 70. Then he'll have to wait until he's 75 for the call. There is a lot that can go wrong when you are that age. I'd hate for his family and him, in this example, to miss that special moment because of some silly rule to let a person's work marinate for a while with the voters. Utter bullsh-t... Well, since you opened that Pandora's box, I don't like a lot of the unwritten rules about the HOF voting, and some of the written ones.On the formal side, I don't like setting a limit to the number of guys that can be elected in a given year. If enough guys get the votes in a given year, why not induct them all? On the informal side, I don't like this whole first ballot concept. A guy, in your estimation as a voter, is either worthy of the HOF or he isn't,.

I agree on everything you wrote. And despite that, I don't anything will change.

Although I think the Hockey HoF has some expedited proces in place...?

noted that some of these HoF voters have become very full of themselves and act like they are electing the next pope when in reality they are choosing who the next guys who get to be honored by a sports museum.

If a player attempts a throw-in and it goes out of bounds
while never entering the field of play, they get a do-over.

So stupid; if a player makes a mistake why do they get awarded another chance?

The main consequences of the penalty is an automatic first down. The five yards is secondary. It's not a "five yard penalty," it's an "automatic first down" penalty, plus five yards. The automatic first down is a deterrent. Otherwise on 3rd and long, the defense would pretty much hold all the time, take the penalty and replay the down. On, say, 3rd and 25 they could do that four times and it would still only be 3rd and 5. So the automatic first down tells the defense "Do not fucking hold."

Same thing with pass interference. In certain situations, if there's no spot foul, the defense will ALWAYS commit PI. Time running out, offense out of field goal range, D will always take a 15-yard penalty rather than let a pass be completed to put the O in range of a game winning FG or pass to the end zone.

Sometimes you need a deterrent.

We see in basketball that there are some situations where fouling is pretty much automatic, even without extreme situations like "hack-a-Shaq". We don't want to get to that in football.

the ball can cross the plane at the goal line and it will count as a TD. If the ball crosses the plane on the sideline while you running along that sideline, it is not called out of bounds. Same thing with the back of the end zone.

In comment 13973391 81_Great_Dane said:

Quote:

The main consequences of the penalty is an automatic first down. The five yards is secondary. It's not a "five yard penalty," it's an "automatic first down" penalty, plus five yards. The automatic first down is a deterrent. Otherwise on 3rd and long, the defense would pretty much hold all the time, take the penalty and replay the down. On, say, 3rd and 25 they could do that four times and it would still only be 3rd and 5. So the automatic first down tells the defense "Do not fucking hold." Same thing with pass interference. In certain situations, if there's no spot foul, the defense will ALWAYS commit PI. Time running out, offense out of field goal range, D will always take a 15-yard penalty rather than let a pass be completed to put the O in range of a game winning FG or pass to the end zone. Sometimes you need a deterrent. We see in basketball that there are some situations where fouling is pretty much automatic, even without extreme situations like "hack-a-Shaq". We don't want to get to that in football.

My point about defensive holding and pass interference is that on the offensive side of the ball you can review/challenge if it was a catch or if a first down was reached but you cannot challenge defensive PI or holding and those plays (justifiably or not) can be just as or more impactful than a catch or a 1st down.

It always seemed to me like a fundamental flaw of basketball that teams foul at the end of games to stop the clock. There's an intentional foul rule that awards the ball back to the fouled team, isn't there? Why isn't it applied in those situations?

used to goaltend FG's - I think only a couple and the league banned the practice following that season.

In comment 13973435 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

used to goaltend FG's - I think only a couple and the league banned the practice following that season.

that is a really dumb rule. if you don't use the goal post (or a teammate) for leverage you should be able to block a FG at the goal posts. If you catch a missed FG you can return it, so why can't you jump and try and catch it?

it's probably obscure enough it won't be a priority to change it but I think it's a dumb rule.

In comment 13973303 shyster said:

Quote:

In comment 13973191 section125 said: Quote: In comment 13972640 pjcas18 said: Quote: tried to block a FG on it's way down? that would be some ridiculous athleticism and timing. It seems like players like Tony Gonzalez or Jimmy Graham barely make it high enough to spike the football over the goal post. to be able to time a jump right and swat a moving football out of the air should be allowed. I can see them saying you can't use the goal post as leverage, but if you can jump up and swat the FG away you should be able to. Has this happened and resulted in something? I think it is legal. I've seen it happen. Not legal: [quote] Goaltending is against the rules in football, not just basketball: A player who jumps up and touches a ball as it is about to go through the goal posts in an attempt to block a field goal is flagged for goaltending, a 15-yard penalty. This came up when 49ers kicker David Akers hit the crossbar with his record-tying 63-yard field goal, and Packers receiver Randall Cobb jumped up and just missed knocking the ball away. ghost of mikan - ( New Window )

Wow. Thanks. That is a stupid rule.

wonder why there is no challenge on video for strikes in baseball. Some calls on strikes are so bad sometimes.

In soccer or hockey. These are team games not one on one. In an nfl game if there was a tie you don’t start a field goal kicking shootout or in the nba a free throw or three point shooting contest. Play until there’s a goal

With soccer somehow it seems fitting.

imagine how different tennis would be if they didn't give you a do over after a missed first serve?

a FG and the rule was changed the next year, but it looks like Morris Stroud was the key guy:

Quote:

In seven years, Morris Stroud caught 54 passes for 977 yards, seven touchdowns, and averaged 18.1 yards per reception. However, Stroud became a notable special teams player — specifically at blocking field goals. On many opponents' field goal attempts, Stroud lined up under the goalposts and tried to deflect the ball as it came down. Later rule changes led to the adoption of Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (informally known as the "Stroud Rule"): "Goal tending by any player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goal post is prohibited. The referee could award 3 points for a palpably unfair act".

In comment 13973551 steve in ky said:

Quote:

imagine how different tennis would be if they didn't give you a do over after a missed first serve?

Milos Raonic would be broke if they eliminated the second serve

If a winner can't be decided after a full game, plus OT...more than likely the winner is going to be getting a lucky goal at some point anyways.

If you don't like the shootout, then do something to complete the game before OT ends.

Is when the offensive team takes a penalty back to their own end zone and it’s half the distance to the goalline I think the first down yardage should be ten years harder if it was a ten yard penalty type such as holding. As is it’s just half the distance first and 13 or 14, depending on the yardage. Make it 10 more.