Worst Rule in Sports (besides the BCS)?

[Genius]

These are the ones off the top of my head. Add as necessary.

[wacker]

I always thought the scorecard error was BS. Its not like you are the only one keeping track of your shots, a fuck up by your caddy shouldn't mean you lose your shit.

[gigantor]

nfl overtime is an abortion...how do you let two teams play for 60 minutes, then not give each an equal chance to win in overtime..

[Genius]

To me, it's between the lack of uniformity in the DH rule, pass interference in the end zone, and the All-Star Game/WS nonsense. I think I'll pick the last one, because if the AL fans decided to get together one year and all vote for the shittiest players in the NL, they could basically guarantee homefield.

[Stax]

I wish I could just say FOOTBALL overtime, but I'll say NFL. The NCAA thing of starting on set goallines after a while is dumb, so is the sudden death mode for the NFL... It's just dumb. WHY would you not just play another quarter (or maybe a bit shorter) like EVERY OTHER SPORTS OVERTIME?

[mongo]

the allstar game deciding homefield advantage is total fucking bullshit.

[hatepoppy]

anyone who picked the nfl overtime is a pussy who needs better defense.

[VoxAngelikus]

Does it have to be a current rule? Because the NHL's "in the crease" rule was not only one of the worst rules of all time, it also cost the Buffalo Sabres a Stanley Cup.

[Hoser]

The Instigator rule in the NHL is pure horse shit.

[Morfin]

My overall worst rule is allowing time-outs. I don't think they should be allowed at all. Let the game be played on the field/court. The better-prepared team will prevail. Why, when time is running out, when the pressure is on, should a team be able to stop the clock and work out a play? It is the team that is prepared for the situation and can handle the pressure while the clock is ticking down that will come out on top.

Hockey used to play with no time-outs, although now they allow one. Line up and play.

Besides, basketball games are interminable at the end. Play the friggin' game.

[Stax]

To me, it's between the lack of uniformity in the DH rule, pass interference in the end zone, and the All-Star Game/WS nonsense. I think I'll pick the last one, because if the AL fans decided to get together one year and all vote for the shittiest players in the NL, they could basically guarantee homefield.

Thing about that is it's better than what was there before, just varying back and forth year by year for no reason. The All-Star Game is at least really vaguely a contest between the leagues, so (theoretically) an ok proxy for which league "wins" home field. I agree that the NBA model of best record for home field/court makes more sense, but of course you aren't playing each other (except through what I think MLB's worst rule is, interleague play). Who was better last year, the Angels who dominated an easy division loaded with cupcakes that no other playoff team got to face as often or the Phillies? Angels had more wins, but were they 'better'?

[Genius]

Yeah, I didn't include hockey rules, basically because I have no idea what they mean. The only hockey I watch all year is when they play outside.

[ShitBreak]

DH Rule needs to either die, or only be used for injured players/players over 35 years old.

[redsox39]

To me, it's between the lack of uniformity in the DH rule, pass interference in the end zone, and the All-Star Game/WS nonsense. I think I'll pick the last one, because if the AL fans decided to get together one year and all vote for the shittiest players in the NL, they could basically guarantee homefield.

To be fair, that crap happens anyways. Popular players on popular teams way past their primes get voted in, year after year. Fan voting is retarded.

[Genius]

Thing about that is it's better than what was there before, just varying back and forth year by year for no reason. The All-Star Game is at least really vaguely a contest between the leagues, so (theoretically) an ok proxy for which league "wins" home field. I agree that the NBA model of best record for home field/court makes more sense, but of course you aren't playing each other (except through what I think MLB's worst rule is, interleague play). Who was better last year, the Angels who dominated an easy division loaded with cupcakes that no other playoff team got to face as often or the Phillies? Angels had more wins, but were they 'better'?
I don't think there is a good way. But letting the fans potentially decide the outcome of the championship is maybe the most awful conclusion you could come to. Fans are generally ignorant AND fiercely loyal. A terrible combination.

[Stax]

I don't think there is a good way. But letting the fans potentially decide the outcome of the championship is maybe the most awful conclusion you could come to. Fans are generally ignorant AND fiercely loyal. A terrible combination.

It's better than complete randomness, because the All Star Game DOES serve as at least a really really really rough example of which league is better (at least a better picture than the completely random variation gets you). Again, I agree the NBA-way would be better, but the lack of true interleague competition DOES mean that division and league strength will be almost entirely unaccounted for (so lesser teams from shit divisions/leagues will have a better shot at home field than, for example, whoever comes out of the AL East this year with 3 seriously competitive teams all cutting each other down).

[Genius]

I actually think that involving the fans is worse than complete randomness, but I am surrounded by idiot Indians fans.

[The Dude]

The Instigator rule in the NHL is pure horse shit.

[The Dude]

and what is the "NBA Travelling" rule? is it the lack of calls or what are we talking about here?

[Genius]

and what is the "NBA Travelling" rule? is it the lack of calls or what are we talking about here?
Yes. Or the fact that even when it is called, there's no consistency, because the same play 30 seconds later isn't called.

[gigantor]

its like a guideline...if you took like 5 steps they'd have to call it, but some players can get away with 3 or 4...its like a range call depending on how good the player is...just need to accept it at this point..

[Rover]

NFL: I hate the over protection of the QB. I also hate the timeout before a FG attempt. Did they change that? I also hate that they keep changing rules every year. I wish they'd use the extra wide hashmarks that the NCAA uses. Field goals aren't much of a challenge anymore inside of 45 yards.

MLB: I like the Allstar/WS thing because it adds something to the game. I hate that pitchers get ejected for throwing inside and that batters are allowed to wear armor and shields.

NBA: The non-call of travelling. I also hate the superstar calls.

NHL: So much to hate. I hate practically all of it. But mostly I hate the inconsistency of the calls from game to game. It's a million times worse than an umpire's strike zone being extra wide for a game. Hooking isn't always hooking. Interference isn't always interference. I also hate that the goaltender can't stick handle the puck in the corners. I hate that they're trying to completely remove fighting.

NCAAF: Not much other than the BCS.

NCAAB: I hate the running clock during the last 2 minutes of the first half and that you can't advance the ball to the frontcourt on a timeout at the end of a half. You have to rely on Kentucky completely blowing their defense or Tyus Edney to sprint the whole length if you want a chance to win a game at the end. I don't even begin to pretend to understand why they refuse to use a jump ball to determine possession. But I like that NCAAB is completely different than the NBA. So maybe my complaints are minor.

[Piglet]

it was a tie between ncaab posession arrow and golf card rule but in the end i went with the latter =-|

[Da Raider]

TUCK RULE

[Hoser]

NHL: So much to hate. I hate practically all of it. But mostly I hate the inconsistency of the calls from game to game. It's a million times worse than an umpire's strike zone being extra wide for a game. Hooking isn't always hooking. Interference isn't always interference. I also hate that the goaltender can't stick handle the puck in the corners. I hate that they're trying to completely remove fighting.


I agree on all but the goalie thing. I like that rule. But the inconsistency really pisses me off. And the fact that they cannot do a reply for anything but a goal.

[heelsguy]

actually, I do not like the NCAAF rule where if you are a DB and get beaten on a route you can just tackle the WR, save a possible TD and only lose 15 yds. how is that fair?

[Stax]

actually, I do not like the NCAAF rule where if you are a DB and get beaten on a route you can just tackle the WR, save a possible TD and only lose 15 yds. how is that fair?

That's true. I think the NFL spot-foul makes WAY more sense. Under the NCAA version you are REWARDED for your penalty depending on the situation.

[heelsguy]

That's true. I think the NFL spot-foul makes WAY more sense. Under the NCAA version you are REWARDED for your penalty depending on the situation.

that's why it is retarded that it is listed among the others.

I also hate the DH. If you are a ball player you should have to grab a bat. especially if you throw high and inside (*cough clemens cough*)

[Stax]

that's why it is retarded that it is listed among the others.

I also hate the DH. If you are a ball player you should have to grab a bat. especially if you throw high and inside (*cough clemens cough*)

I find the DH complaints interesting as there are a multitude of schools:

1. Some don't like the AL/NL split of rules
2. Some don't like that someone can hit without fielding
3. Some don't like that someone can pitching without hitting
4. Some don't like the "loss of strategy"

[ADD]

As much as I hate NFL overtime, the fact a fucking exhibition game decides home field for the World Series is beyond bullshit and therefore wins.

[Hoser]

NFL overtime is retarded and makes no sense.

[misterfatt]

the NFL's recent crackdown and enforcement of penalties following celebrations is one of the biggest jokes ever. it is a game. if the NFL doesn't want players like TO, chad johnson, or steve smith coming up with individual gimmicks, maybe they shouldn't have banned team celebrations. the integrity of the NFL remained intact long after the icky shuffle and fun bunch's group high-fives. loosen up.

[heelsguy]

the NFL's recent crackdown and enforcement of penalties following celebrations is one of the biggest jokes ever. it is a game. if the NFL doesn't want players like TO, chad johnson, or steve smith coming up with individual gimmicks, maybe they shouldn't have banned team celebrations. the integrity of the NFL remained intact long after the icky shuffle and fun bunch's group high-fives. loosen up.

first blame emmitt smith. because of him they instituted the helmet rule. then the real crackdown started once players started bringing props into it...T.O's pen, Joe Horn's hidden cell-phone in the goalpost padding...it is as necessary to have that in the NFL as NBA and rules preventing hanging on the rim.

[Face]

they're all stupid

ANARCHY!!!

[ruffdog]

NHL: Penalty - puck over glass in defensive zone

[Das Kahlua]

MLB: Infield fly rule.

[eleveneighteen]

NFL overtime is a joke and teams win or lose by the flip of a coin for the most part. However they still have a chance to influence the outcome.

MLB All-Star Game determining who gets home field for the WS is an absolute travesty. Total. Fucking. Bullshit.

A team could run up the best record of all time and not get home field? WTF.

[Das Kahlua]

MLB: First round of playoffs best of 5 instead of 7.

[Stax]

MLB: First round of playoffs best of 5 instead of 7.

That's pretty retarded too

[papillon]

NHL: Can't touch the goalie when they leave the crease.

[ruffdog]

NHL: Can't touch the goalie when they leave the crease.

Idiot

[Das Kahlua]

Every sport: Fines or other punishments for players or coaches who make legitimate public criticisms of mistakes made by officials.

[Hoser]

NHL: Penalty - puck over glass in defensive zone

That is a great rule. It stops teams from just shooting it over the glass when they get tired. We don't have the rule in my league and I do it all the time to stop goals from happening.

[ruffdog]

That is a great rule. It stops teams from just shooting it over the glass when they get tired. We don't have the rule in my league and I do it all the time to stop goals from happening.

I think its retarded. U can shoot the puck over the glass accidentally as this is the case in most games.

It would be better change the rule so that if they shoot the puck over the glass they can get a line change and the face off is in their defensive zone.

[Archangel]

Every sport: Fines or other punishments for players or coaches who make legitimate public criticisms of mistakes made by officials.

Winner.

[Hoser]

I think its retarded. U can shoot the puck over the glass accidentally as this is the case in most games.

It would be better change the rule so that if they shoot the puck over the glass they can get a line change and the face off is in their defensive zone.

You can trip someone by accident as well, but it is still a penalty.

Why should they get a line change? That is the whole point, they put the rule in so they can't get a line change or if they really want it then they will be penalized.

The rule has increased scoring, which is a good thing. It isn't that hard to not shoot it over the glass, it takes a bit of effort to get it that high.

[ruffdog]

You can trip someone by accident as well, but it is still a penalty.

Why should they get a line change? That is the whole point, they put the rule in so they can't get a line change or if they really want it then they will be penalized.

The rule has increased scoring, which is a good thing. It isn't that hard to not shoot it over the glass, it takes a bit of effort to get it that high.

I meant to say can't get a line change. same as icing

[Hoser]

That would be good as well. but I like the penalty. They are pretty good with catching tips, so really it only gets called if it is a real shot out. I like it. The enforcer rule is really the only bad new rule, the rest are pretty good and increase scoring.

[jemeske]

I don't have a huge problem with the possession arrow rule for basketball. That penalizes small guards who can get a tie up against a bigger player and will almost certainly lose in a jump ball situation. Its not perfect, but a real jump ball isn't necessarily fair either. Shot clocks should not reset if the offense retains possession though.

[TheImpossibleMan]

Da Raider beat me to it. Tuck rule. Such fucking bullshit.

[Hobnail_Boot]

This poll fails because some of those rules are equally bad. We should be able to select multiple choices.

[Satan]

NFL QB protection is by far the worst. Every year a QB goes down, the very next year they outlaw whatever injured him. I'm waiting for someone to fart in the QBs face and see them make a rule to outlaw that.

[heelsguy]

NFL QB protection is by far the worst. Every year a QB goes down, the very next year they outlaw whatever injured him. I'm waiting for someone to fart in the QBs face and see them make a rule to outlaw that.


I don't know. i think it depends on perspective. if you are carson palmer or tom brady I think you appreciate the value of the new rule. It was not like they jumped it with after it happened just the first time.

In other words, when it is YOUR team's qb who gets knocked out for the season, the rule has more value. agree?

and it is not just about QB's. the horsecollar rule was after steve smith was lost for the season and then T.O was injured against dallas

[Satan]

I don't know. i think it depends on perspective. if you are carson palmer or tom brady I think you appreciate the value of the new rule. It was not like they jumped it with after it happened just the first time.

In other words, when it is YOUR team's qb who gets knocked out for the season, the rule has more value. agree?

and it is not just about QB's. the horsecollar rule was after steve smith was lost for the season and then T.O was injured against dallasThe QBs are fucking football players too. Every year they put more and more restrictions on how defenses can handle them. There should be rules for some of the more unique vulnerabilities of a given position, but not to the extreme the NFL is taking it. They aren't trying to protect the players, they're trying to protect their wallets.

[Stax]

The QBs are fucking football players too. Every year they put more and more restrictions on how defenses can handle them. There should be rules for some of the more unique vulnerabilities of a given position, but not to the extreme the NFL is taking it. They aren't trying to protect the players, they're trying to protect their wallets.

And? How do you think the NFL (the business) should operate? Not protect it's superstars?

[Satan]

And? How do you think the NFL (the business) should operate? Not protect it's superstars?
They should let the play the fucking game.

[Stax]

They should let the play the fucking game.

How's that working out for you? In any arena of competition where business is involved anywhere?

[Satan]

How's that working out for you? In any arena of competition where business is involved anywhere?Pandering to superstars destroys the credibility of the league and the sport in general. The NBA has just about become a joke because of the way they pander to stars, the NFL is well on its way.

[mongo]

it's no wonder guys like manning and brady can throw for 9000 td's each year. doesn't seem fair to bart starr.

[CrazyCarl]

I mean, a player on the ground can't tackle the QB? fuck that

[Satan]

I mean, a player on the ground can't tackle the QB? fuck that
But but but, it's a business!1!one

[Stax]

But but but, it's a business!1!one

As long as you're whining about capitalist forces doing what is logical why not complain that Kraft or whatever doesn't ship smore food over to starving kids?

[CrazyCarl]

I think starving kids would prefer something other than s'mores

[Stax]

I think starving kids would prefer something other than s'mores

Don't talk shit about s'mores.

[Satan]

As long as you're whining about capitalist forces doing what is logical why not complain that Kraft or whatever doesn't ship smore food over to starving kids?
Its not 'the capitalist way'. It's the short sited capitalist way. They protect their superstars now, but over time they destroy their credibility. They continually try and push the NFL to overseas audiences, while pissing off their fanbase abroad. The decisions they keep making now are going to come back to haunt them because they're pissing on the fans that have made football such a popular sport.

[Hanover Fist]

Mac n Cheese?

[heelsguy]

a starting NFL QB is a rare and invaluable commodity. there are only 32 of them on the planet. backups are a mile behind them in talent.
teams worth millions are depending on them being able to play...it is essential to not allow cheap shots which knock them out for the year. I am not talking about simple hard hits...QB should be able to take clean hits as you're right: they are player and have pads and helmets. We are talking about career ending hits to the head and below the waist.

[Rover]

The QBs are fucking football players too. Every year they put more and more restrictions on how defenses can handle them. There should be rules for some of the more unique vulnerabilities of a given position, but not to the extreme the NFL is taking it. They aren't trying to protect the players, they're trying to protect their wallets.The easy solution for the wallet protection is to completely get rid of guaranteed money.

And? How do you think the NFL (the business) should operate? Not protect it's superstars?Totally!! Let's just eliminate the pass rush to protect the franchise stars. Maybe we can do a 5 Mississippi count and then play 2 hand touch.

[Satan]

a starting NFL QB is a rare and invaluable commodity.
teams worth millions are depending on them being able to play...it is essential to not allow cheap shots which knock them out for the year. I am not talking about simple hard hits...QB should be able to take clean hits as you're right: they are player and have pads and helmets. We are talking about career ending hits to the head and below the waist.
So you're saying that they should be treated differently by the rules because of their skillset? Shouldn't everyone play by the same rules?

[Stax]

Totally!! Let's just eliminate the pass rush to protect the franchise stars. Maybe we can do a 5 Mississippi count and then play 2 hand touch.

An unnecessary hit by a guy on the ground that did nothing to help win a game sidelined one of the most popular figures in the game playing for one of the most successful teams of recent years and likely kept them out of the big-money-making playoffs. Instead the NFL got the lucky Dolphins who got the shit beaten out of them by Baltimore.

Eliminating stupid, dangerous, and unnecessary things are not the same as moving to some softer game and suggesting that they are is silly.

[Satan]

An unnecessary hit by a guy on the ground that did nothing to help win a game sidelined one of the most popular figures in the game playing for one of the most successful teams of recent years and likely kept them out of the big-money-making playoffs. Instead the NFL got the lucky Dolphins who got the shit beaten out of them by Baltimore.

Eliminating stupid, dangerous, and unnecessary things are not the same as moving to some softer game and suggesting that they are is silly.
That was not a cheap or unnecessary hit. The guy was finishing the play. The credibility of the game is far more valuable than any superstar. That will last as long as they maintain it. Superstars have a much more limited shelf life.

[heelsguy]

So you're saying that they should be treated differently by the rules because of their skillset? Shouldn't everyone play by the same rules?

no, not skillset, POSITION. as I said, an NFL starting QB is worth so much more than just a running back or lineman. all players have rules protecting them from hits to the head, etc. but an NFL QB who plants his leg to make a throw should not have to worry about some 300 lb lineman throwing himself on to his knees and ruining his season like Palmer and Brady had happen to them. This is not a matter of toughness. No other position on the field is such where a player is planted like that, and people are coming to hit him. In all other positions, both parties are moving..they are in flux.

[Stax]

That was not a cheap or unnecessary hit. The guy was finishing the play. The credibility of the game is far more valuable than any superstar. That will last as long as they maintain it. Superstars have a much more limited shelf life.

If he had just dived to take out someone's knees, wouldn't that be a penalty of some kind? Why should it be different if he's on the ground?

[TheImpossibleMan]

I just don't like seeing scary black men hit successful white men. Remember the Brady!

[mongo]

That was not a cheap or unnecessary hit. The guy was finishing the play. The credibility of the game is far more valuable than any superstar. That will last as long as they maintain it. Superstars have a much more limited shelf life.

i tend to agree w/ this. we got past bo jackson, right?

[mongo]

no, not skillset, POSITION. as I said, an NFL starting QB is worth so much more than just a running back or lineman. all players have rules protecting them from hits to the head, etc. but an NFL QB who plants his leg to make a throw should not have to worry about some 300 lb lineman throwing himself on to his knees and ruining his season like Palmer and Brady had happen to them. This is not a matter of toughness. No other position on the field is such where a player is planted like that, and people are coming to hit him. In all other positions, both parties are moving..they are in flux.

i think this is the fundamental difference here. you don't think they should have to worry. chris does.

[Satan]

If he had just dived to take out someone's knees, wouldn't that be a penalty of some kind? Why should it be different if he's on the ground?Thats where the question of intent comes in. diving at someone's knees is generally deliberate. When you're on the ground, you're just trying to do anything you can to finish the play.

[Rover]

An unnecessary hit by a guy on the ground that did nothing to help win a game sidelined one of the most popular figures in the game playing for one of the most successful teams of recent years and likely kept them out of the big-money-making playoffs. Instead the NFL got the lucky Dolphins who got the shit beaten out of them by Baltimore.

Eliminating stupid, dangerous, and unnecessary things are not the same as moving to some softer game and suggesting that they are is silly.Maybe the rule should be 'No tackling Tom Brady' or 'No tackling New England'. Tackling is inherently both stupid and dangerous, however it is completely necessary to football.

[Stax]

Thats where the question of intent comes in. diving at someone's knees is generally deliberate. When you're on the ground, you're just trying to do anything you can to finish the play.

True or false, tackling someone below the knees is a penalty?

[heelsguy]

Thats where the question of intent comes in. diving at someone's knees is generally deliberate. When you're on the ground, you're just trying to do anything you can to finish the play.

As far as that new rule goes, you should have to get your fat ass up, (or how about this? never fall down in the first place) and hit the QB the right way. "any way you can" is fine as long as it is not against the rules.

I was talking in general, that it is ok in my opinion to have special rules for protecting what is certainly a very special position. the drop-off from starting NFL QB to the back up NFL QB is about a mile, usually.

edit: you KNOW I am not a NE fan. and I sure as shit am not a bengals fan either, I just do not like watching backups because someone took a cheap shot. we all get hurt by referrees babying QB's, but it is worth it in the big picture.

[Weenis]

The QBs are fucking football players too. Every year they put more and more restrictions on how defenses can handle them. There should be rules for some of the more unique vulnerabilities of a given position, but not to the extreme the NFL is taking it. They aren't trying to protect the players, they're trying to protect their wallets.

Ok, but no other position on the field plays like a QB. He's more prone standing there than most players on a given play. I would agree that the protection has gotten a bit out of hand, but I don't think it's all that wrong to have a different set of rules to protect the position.

[CrazyCarl]

True or false, tackling someone below the knees is a penalty?
False?

[Stax]

False?

Really? I thought tackling was only allowed above the knees?

[CrazyCarl]

I don't know, RB's get brought down by ankle/foot tackles all the time

[heelsguy]

I mean, we have all seen QB's babied beyond belief. but there is a reason. no one wants to watch a bunch of matt moores and matt cassells playing each other because a defender led with his helmet or went for the knees.

but are these inforced correctly? probably not. none other than ed hoculi himself screwed peppers and cost us a pick-6 when callied a illegal hit on ryan last october. replays showed peppers led with his shoulder, but he was still fined 10k.

[Archangel]

The rules that defined the new front and rear wings in F1 are rapidly getting to the head of this line.

[CrazyCarl]

If there had never been any special rules in place, wouldn't we just chalk those situations up the breaks of the game? One special rule begets another, and so on and so on.

[Weenis]

I don't know, RB's get brought down by ankle/foot tackles all the time

Yes, but when a RB gets taken down he's on the move. A QB is usually stationary.

If you were running at full speed and got tripped up by someone hitting you below the knee, I would imagine that's less dangerous than if someone hit you in the same way when you were standing still or planting your foot.

[heelsguy]

If there had never been any special rules in place, wouldn't we just chalk those situations up the breaks of the game? One special rule begets another, and so on and so on.

at what point does a rule become a "special" rule as opposed to just a necessary rule voted on by the competition committee to protect players from injury due to cheap/late/shots?

[Hobnail_Boot]

a starting NFL QB is a rare and invaluable commodity. there are only 32 of them on the planet. backups are a mile behind them in talent.
teams worth millions are depending on them being able to play...it is essential to not allow cheap shots which knock them out for the year. I am not talking about simple hard hits...QB should be able to take clean hits as you're right: they are player and have pads and helmets. We are talking about career ending hits to the head and below the waist.
What you described here is NOT what gets called most often on Sundays. I mean, if a DT "taps" the helmet of a QB (and doesn't even knock the guy down) while he's in pursuit, he get's flagged for a 15 yard penalty. That is bullshit, but it happens almost every Sunday in the NFL.

[Weenis]

What you described here is NOT what gets called most often on Sundays. I mean, if a DT "taps" the helmet of a QB (and doesn't even knock the guy down) while he's in pursuit, he get's flagged for a 15 yard penalty. That is bullshit, but it happens almost every Sunday in the NFL.

That's the stuff that pisses people off. There really should be some room for interpretation in the rules.

I think it's pretty clear to know when a guy takes a run at a QB and when the scenario you described happens.

The blow to the head flag is probably the worst offender. Like you said, you can barely touch a helmet and get 15 yards. I'm all for limiting big head shots, but there has to be some room for interpretation.

[heelsguy]

That's the stuff that pisses people off. There really should be some room for interpretation in the rules.

I think it's pretty clear to know when a guy takes a run at a QB and when the scenario you described happens.

The blow to the head flag is probably the worst offender. Like you said, you can barely touch a helmet and get 15 yards. I'm all for limiting big head shots, but there has to be some room for interpretation.

all true NFL fans want correct interpretation and application of the rules protecting qb's. and I agree we do not have that. that does not mean the RULE is a bad one.

[Hobnail_Boot]

all true NFL fans want correct interpretation and application of the rules protecting qb's. and I agree we do not have that. that does not mean the RULE is a bad one.
As long as the rule remains absolute, it is a bad one!

[heelsguy]

As long as the rule remains absolute, it is a bad one!

is that head-tapping example you cited one of those absolute ones? can't refs simply NOT call it if they deem it inconsequential?

remember, the players union has played a big part in lobbying for rules aimed at protecting players from concussions, and injuries in general. it is not ALL the owners

[Hobnail_Boot]

is that head-tapping example you cited one of those absolute ones? can't refs simply NOT call it if they deem it inconsequential?

remember, the players union has played a big part in lobbying for rules aimed at protecting players from concussions, and injuries in general. it is not ALL the owners
15 Yards (and disqualification if flagrant)

Striking opponent with fist.
Kicking or kneeing opponent.
Striking opponent on head or neck with forearm, elbow, or hands whether or not the initial contact is made below the neck area.
Roughing kicker.
Roughing passer.
Malicious unnecessary roughness.
Unsportsmanlike conduct.
Palpably unfair act. (Distance penalty determined by the Referee after consultation with other officials.)


http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries

The officials consistently cite the rulebook when the call that bullshit penalty.

[heelsguy]

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries

The officials consistently cite the rulebook when the call that bullshit penalty.

well the key word is striking. They should only call it when it is an obvious purposeful blow to the head.

STRIKE...verb (used with object)
1.to deal a blow or stroke to (a person or thing), as with the fist, a weapon, or a hammer; hit.
2.to inflict, deliver, or deal (a blow, stroke, attack, etc.).
3.to drive so as to cause impact: to strike the hands together.
4.to thrust forcibly: Brutus struck a dagger into the dying Caesar. )

[Draven X 23]

Where is the choice that says Hot Women have to wear shirts?

[Hobnail_Boot]

well the key word is striking. They should only call it when it is an obvious purposeful blow to the head.
I agree, but that's not what they actually DO.

[shdaow]

The CFL Rouge. Why the fuck should we be awarded a point for missing a FG?

[Menace2Sobriety]

There's a rule in CFL de-emphasising FGs? We need that in rugby.

[Das Kahlua]

Ok, but no other position on the field plays like a QB. He's more prone standing there than most players on a given play. I would agree that the protection has gotten a bit out of hand, but I don't think it's all that wrong to have a different set of rules to protect the position.

How about during the (I believe it was the AFC Championship game) when the defensive player missed blocking the punt, but never touched the punter, and then on the down swing of his leg, the punter hit the back of the defensive player's back.

The defensive team was assessed a major penalty, with of course no recourse of replay or anything of the sort.

The 'Tom Bradys' of the world aren't the only ones with undue protection.

[heelsguy]

How about during the (I believe it was the AFC Championship game) when the defensive player missed blocking the punt, but never touched the punter, and then on the down swing of his leg, the punter hit the back of the defensive player's back.

The defensive team was assessed a major penalty, with of course no recourse of replay or anything of the sort.

The 'Tom Bradys' of the world aren't the only ones with undue protection.


well, true, but at least if the defensive player touches the punt AT ALL, his body can in the process completely wipe out the punter with... absolutely NO fear of penalty.

so they are not THAT protected.

[shdaow]

There's a rule in CFL de-emphasising FGs? We need that in rugby.

Essentially, the rule is whenever a ball is kicked out the back of the endzone, its worth 1 point. So that means you can score on Punts and FGs unless (a) someone returns it or (b) a Kicker is placed in the Endzone to catch the football and kick it back.

[Genius]

Essentially, the rule is whenever a ball is kicked out the back of the endzone, its worth 1 point. So that means you can score on Punts and FGs unless (a) someone returns it or (b) a Kicker is placed in the Endzone to catch the football and kick it back.
Why wouldn't you just kick the fuck out of the ball every time you got to the 50? Oh, I forgot, you guys have like 60 yard endzones. And seven downs. And no out-of-bounds.

[s0bv1ou5lyd3sprt]

I voted for NFL overtime, but no IR in MLB is one of my biggest.

[Billy]

The NBA's finger wag rule

[Das Kahlua]

I voted for NFL overtime, but no IR in MLB is one of my biggest.

MLB has IR now, but it's only used for things like HRs.

[BooBooBear]

Major League Baseball deciding the home advantage in the World Series by the All Star game winner is terrible!

[Hoser]

Why wouldn't you just kick the fuck out of the ball every time you got to the 50? Oh, I forgot, you guys have like 60 yard endzones. And seven downs. And no out-of-bounds.

110 yard fields and 3 downs.

[shdaow]

Why wouldn't you just kick the fuck out of the ball every time you got to the 50? Oh, I forgot, you guys have like 60 yard endzones. And seven downs. And no out-of-bounds.

We even have White starting-RBs!

[moe_blunts]

the lack of "flopping" calls in the NBA