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