What are the worst rules in sports?

[DeToxRox]

The NHL thread had me thinking .. What are some of the worst rules in sports?

In the NHL the Instigator Rule is absurd. It takes the frontier justice out of hockey, and allows for annoying players without much skill to run around the ice causing havoc without much fear of reprecution.

The other rule which might be the worst rule ever in anything is the Blackout Rule in the NFL.

It's an antiquated rule from the 50's that was made because people feared games on TV meant no one would go to the stadium to see the game. Only 7 blackouts this year, and 5 were Lions games, so the fact is pretty simple: people go to the games regardless, unless they're driven to insanity like Lions fans.

[MJ4H]

Tuck rule?

[Dr. Sak]

Shouldn't Lions fans be happy there were blackouts? That's fewer games they have to suffer.

[Logan]

It may include the word, but I don't consider the blackout policy an actual rule.

I'm anti-DH, but either way, the rule should be uniform to both baseball leagues.

[SackAttack]

Offside in soccer drives me bugshit.

[MrDNA]

I'm going to throw this one out there: holding in the NFL. It gets called, what, maybe 1 out of every 5 times it happens, so why bother to call it at all? Just go nuts out there and bring back some of the old D-linemen moves that have been outlawed. Give those refs a rest :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Block in the back, on the receiving team.

[MJ4H]

Soccer would probably be ridiculous without offsides. But speaking of soccer, how about the away goals rule? My god.

[Logan]

The rule that provides for bout 95% of all unsportsmanlike penalties called in the NFL.

[Solecismic]

Shouldn't Lions fans be happy there were blackouts? That's fewer games they have to suffer.

I've never been one - just a fan of the NFL in general. I agree that the blackout rule is just plain stupid, as it prevents a team from gaining new fans when they need them the most. And with ticket prices out of the price range of so many fans these days, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

At least stations are allowed to show other games to replace a blackout. It tends to work out. But they almost didn't show the Thanksgiving game, so there wouldn't have been anything on television in that slot.

At this point, if the NFL is going to insist on keeping this stupid rule, better to give some other more-supported team that Thanksgiving slot. I'm sure they know better than to put the Lions on Sunday or Monday night.

One rule that has always bothered me - sacrifice flies in baseball. We're all used to them, but the concept of not leaving a base until the ball is caught is a little bizarre. Either the ball being caught should end the play, or not.

[Logan]

Save rule. Get battered around, give up a couple runs, earn a save and more money on your next deal!

[MIJB#19]

I thought hard and couldn't come up with anything better than second service in tennis.

[bhlloy]

+1 on the instigator rule.

Also agree with MJ4H, you wouldn't be able to play soccer without the offside rule. If they went back to how it was 10 years ago (no "interfering with play" etc...) it would be fine. Typical FIFA trying to tweak things and screwing them up even worse.

I don't mind the away goals rule so much. It does encourage the away team to at least make a match of it, instead of just sitting back in the first leg and playing for the 0-0. IMO, it's why some of the Euro Cup games have been such classics.

[jbergey22]

Illegal defense in the NBA.

Been watching the NBA for 25 years and still dont really understand it.

[sabotai]

+2 on the instigator rule. I also think the NHL should have No-Touch Icing.

[RendeR]

Illegal defense in the NBA.

Been watching the NBA for 25 years and still dont really understand it.


I thought they got rid of that a while back?

[aran]

Whatever rules the A-11 offense is exploiting. They are not strict enough to prevent abuse so they are not well-written rules.

Illegal defense in the NBA.

Been watching the NBA for 25 years and still dont really understand it.

Apparently playing zone defense in the NBA was illegal until relatively recently? I don't know if I trust that, but I remember reading it.

[Mustang]

Sudden death in the NFL

[MJ4H]

Apparently playing zone defense in the NBA was illegal until relatively recently? I don't know if I trust that, but I remember reading it.

This is correct. Zone defense was illegal in the NBA.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Apparently playing zone defense in the NBA was illegal until relatively recently? I don't know if I trust that, but I remember reading it.

Yep. So much so that it's still disorienting to me to watch & realize it isn't illegal now.

[Oilers9911]

The touch-up icing rule in the NHL. Someone is going to get paralyzed or killed one day. Nobody gets excited about two guys chasing down an icing. careers have already been ruined or harmed by that ridiculous rule.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Ooh, just thought of another one -- NASCAR's frozen field on yellow.

[Suburban Rhythm]

+3 (are we up to 3) on the instigator. Especially when it's applied so arbitrarily. Also, although haven't seen it called for awhile, the game misconduct for not having your jersey tied down.

In the NFL, I'd never seen it until this past weekend when Aaron Smith got called for unsportsmanlike for "simulating the snap count". WTF! I guess they are saying that is too deceptive...isn't that what offenses are trying to do to defenses all the time!?

And one that has always bothered me-- spiking the ball to stop the clock. If that same "throw" occurs while a defensive player is running towards the QB, people will be howling for intentional grounding. Call it the same way all the time.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Ooh, just thought of another one -- NASCAR's frozen field on yellow.

Didn't the title say sports? ;)

[MJ4H]

And one that has always bothered me-- spiking the ball to stop the clock. If that same "throw" occurs while a defensive player is running towards the QB, people will be howling for intentional grounding. Call it the same way all the time.

Not sure if you realize it or not, but spiking the ball to stop the clock is specifically allowed in the rulebook.

[RPI-Fan]

Instant replay in the NFL.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Not sure if you realize it or not, but spiking the ball to stop the clock is specifically allowed in the rulebook.

i am saying that is an awful rule. Any other time, that is intentional grounding, no? But because the QB doesn't step back from center, it's acceptable-- because of a shitty rule.

[aran]

So how do you suggest teams stop the clock when out of time-outs? Throw the ball away in the direction of a receiver right after the snap?

[molson]

-5-game MLB Divisional Series. So stupid in a sport like a baseball.
-6 division setups in NHL/NBA. I don't know why they annoy me so much, but they do. It just makes the whole league harder to follow. What's wrong with 4 bigger divisions?
-Small MLB strike zone. Though it's better than it was 10 years ago

[mckerney]

i am saying that is an awful rule. Any other time, that is intentional grounding, no? But because the QB doesn't step back from center, it's acceptable-- because of a shitty rule.

No, it's only a penalty if it's to avoid a sack. If a QB drops back, sees no one open and decides to throw it away even though there's no pressure it's no penalty.

[Grammaticus]

Roughing the passer.

[stevew]

The NBA salary cap and nothing else is even close. It shouldn't take an MBA to figuRe out how to make a trade.

[Grammaticus]

Also for the NFL, it would be great to see one foot in instead of two feet in for a legal in bounds catch.

[Young Drachma]

Baseball's divisional structure was setup with the idea that there would've been two more teams added to the AL by now. This whole 6-team NL Central and 4-team AL West is a bit ridiculous to put it mildly. I don't say expand now, but eliminate the sham that is the two-league structure and find a way to balance things out better.

At the point that we have to suffer through interleague play, we might as well dispense with traditional and arrange a structure that makes sense.

[JW]

The rule allowing NBA teams to advance the ball to midcourt after a timeout after an opposing team basket late in the game. That is the most gimmicky rule in all sport.

[Radii]

The "double bonus" in college basketball where a team gets two free throws automatically after 10 fouls are committed in a half. There's already a punishment for committing too many fouls... individual players start fouling out. Keep shooting 1-and-1's on non-shooting fouls, and if a team's roster is filled with 55-60% free throw shooters, maybe they don't deserve to win close games.

[molson]

Celebration penalties/fines in the NFL

Welker fined $10k for making snow angel (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/12/welker_fined_10.html)

And maybe it's not a terrible rule, but 5 personal fouls for a DQ in college feels like 1 too few. Too many games come down to who's in foul trouble, and it puts too much power in the hands of the refs.

[Radii]

Celebration penalties/fines in the NFL

Welker fined $10k for making snow angel (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/12/welker_fined_10.html)


Heh, I just posted that in the NFL thread, totally agree.

[stevew]

I don't like welker but it was a stupid fine.

[Suburban Rhythm]

No, it's only a penalty if it's to avoid a sack. If a QB drops back, sees no one open and decides to throw it away even though there's no pressure it's no penalty.

Must cross the line of scrimmage, no? Which, the spike also does not do.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Dola

Traveling

I rarely watch the NBA anymore. But the league even agrees that this is worst rule in sports, going as far as not calling it.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I am torn between 3.

DH in MLB

And in the NFL

Sudden Death OT

And the whole thing regarding it not being intentional grounding outside the tackles that allows a qb to just run from a guy and throw it away to avoid a sack. I say when it's obviously just to avoid a sack it should be loss of down AND move the line of scrimmage to the point where he threw it away.

[stevew]

The rule allowing NBA teams to advance the ball to midcourt after a timeout after an opposing team basket late in the game. That is the most gimmicky rule in all sport.

Yep. Highly annoying.

I really hate the different rules for different levels of a sport.

[MJ4H]

I hate that a player has to be touched while down in the NFL. Stupid.

[st.cronin]

Sudden death OT in any sport.
Penalty shootout, in hockey or soccer.
Expanded September rosters in MLB.

Rules that should exist:

- In football, any pass that hits the ground before the line of scrimmage, for whatever reason, is a live ball.

- In baseball, there needs to be some rule preventing teams from making excessive pitching changes. The game has become unwatchable to me.

[ISiddiqui]

The Designated Hitter Rule in the American League

[jbergey22]

The "double bonus" in college basketball where a team gets two free throws automatically after 10 fouls are committed in a half. There's already a punishment for committing too many fouls... individual players start fouling out. Keep shooting 1-and-1's on non-shooting fouls, and if a team's roster is filled with 55-60% free throw shooters, maybe they don't deserve to win close games.


This wouldnt be so bad IF they would move the 3 point line 3 feet to make it atleast a somewhat difficult shot to make. Otherwise IMO its too big on an advantage to foul.

[ISiddiqui]

I hate that a player has to be touched while down in the NFL. Stupid.

On the other hand, I hate that a player that stumbles and hits a knee to the ground, but is touched by no one in college football is down.

[jbergey22]

I thought they got rid of that a while back?


Yeah you are right.

They replaced in with this other rule I dont really understand either. Its called defensive 3 seconds I believe but also has certain conditions to it similiar to the illegal defense from the past.

[MJ4H]

On the other hand, I hate that a player that stumbles and hits a knee to the ground, but is touched by no one in college football is down.

But the thing is, there's never any confusion about that. In the NFL, there is routinely some yahoo that jumps up off the ground and starts running around and half the team is standing around thinking the play is over, the other half isn't sure. Just stupid. Not only could someone get hurt like that, it makes the game look silly. Drives me insane every time.

[ISiddiqui]

But the thing is, there's never any confusion about that. In the NFL, there is routinely some yahoo that jumps up off the ground and starts running around and half the team is standing around thinking the play is over, the other half isn't sure. Just stupid. Not only could someone get hurt like that, it makes the game look silly. Drives me insane every time.

So it's more "clear", doesn't make it any less dumb.

[MJ4H]

I think the fact that players could be hurt by half the team playing on and half thinking the play is over (this happens pretty regularly) and that big plays can be decided because of an unclear outcome when there is already a much better, logical way to do things that is perfectly clear is pretty dumb (logical: player is down. On the ground. Down. DOWNDOWNDOWNDWKQOWJD)DW

TILT

[st.cronin]

I agree with MJ4H.

[jbergey22]

How about in soccer when they call a foul(no cards) and nothing really happens except the team that was fouled gets the ball back.

Shouldnt their always be a penalty for committing a foul?

[SackAttack]

Soccer would probably be ridiculous without offsides. But speaking of soccer, how about the away goals rule? My god.

+1 on the instigator rule.

Also agree with MJ4H, you wouldn't be able to play soccer without the offside rule. If they went back to how it was 10 years ago (no "interfering with play" etc...) it would be fine. Typical FIFA trying to tweak things and screwing them up even worse.

I don't mind the away goals rule so much. It does encourage the away team to at least make a match of it, instead of just sitting back in the first leg and playing for the 0-0. IMO, it's why some of the Euro Cup games have been such classics.

Here's my problem with offside, and the reason I don't like it much.

In hockey, you can pass the puck all around the offensive zone, and as long as the puck stays in the zone, you're not offside.

Soccer, apparently, it's all about where you are relative to the defense at the time the ball is played. So the ball can be played to you legally, you move up into a forward position with it, don't like your shot opportunity, and pass it back toward the center channel. If the defense follows the ball, you have to get back behind the defense before you can legally touch the ball again. What the fuck is that?

I can see not allowing the long balls to cherry-picking forwards, I look at that as akin to the old two-line pass.

But the idea that I can pass the ball to someone else while in legal position and then, WITHOUT MOVING, suddenly be in an illegal position is utter bullshit.

[jbergey22]

But the idea that I can pass the ball to someone else while in legal position and then, WITHOUT MOVING, suddenly be in an illegal position is utter bullshit.


Agree

[jbergey22]

On a side not I think many of soccer rules could be updated.

Extra time where the ref just looks at his watch and says how much extra time will be awarded yet no one really knows when they will blow the final whistle. Why not just have clock and stop the clock on stoppages so everyone just knows instead of over complicating everything.

[ISiddiqui]

I think the fact that players could be hurt by half the team playing on and half thinking the play is over (this happens pretty regularly) and that big plays can be decided because of an unclear outcome when there is already a much better, logical way to do things that is perfectly clear is pretty dumb

Pretty regularly injuries occur as a result of that when?! And there is an easier way to avoid "big play because you think the play is over"... it's called "play till the whistle" blows.

You act like college players don't get up when their knee touches and try to run (thinking they can fool the refs).

[ISiddiqui]

How about in soccer when they call a foul(no cards) and nothing really happens except the team that was fouled gets the ball back.

Shouldnt their always be a penalty for committing a foul?

You mean a penalty kick?!! :eek: When its a minor foul in the middle of the pitch, why shouldn't the team just get the ball back?!

[ISiddiqui]

Extra time where the ref just looks at his watch and says how much extra time will be awarded yet no one really knows when they will blow the final whistle. Why not just have clock and stop the clock on stoppages so everyone just knows instead of over complicating everything.

I think this is mostly done because of poor countries that follow FIFA rules that don't have a clock... that and preventing the scorekeeper from messing with the stoppage timing (as they do in the NFL, NBA, etc).

[jbergey22]

You mean a penalty kick?!! :eek: When its a minor foul in the middle of the pitch, why shouldn't the team just get the ball back?!

Nope I dont mean penalty kick.

Whats to keep them from fouling again? There is no harm to the team that fouls if they dont get a card.

If its so minor then they shouldnt call it.

It would be comparable to calling a foul in basketball when the ball is at the halfcourt line just to have them imbounds the ball again. What exactly is the point?

[ISiddiqui]

Nope I dont mean penalty kick.

Whats to keep them from fouling again? There is no harm to the team that fouls if they dont get a card.

If its so minor then they shouldnt call it.

It would be comparable to calling a foul in basketball when the ball is at the halfcourt line just to have them imbounds the ball again. What exactly is the point?

I can only imagine how chippy games would get if the only fouls were card fouls. Fouls are meant to penalize the team who fouled, so they don't get the ball by an illegal tackle. If the fouled team still has it in a good position, the ref should allow them to play advantage.

That's like saying the only fouls in basketball should be technicals!

[jbergey22]

I can only imagine how chippy games would get if the only fouls were card fouls. Fouls are meant to penalize the team who fouled, so they don't get the ball by an illegal tackle. If the fouled team still has it in a good position, the ref should allow them to play advantage.

That's like saying the only fouls in basketball should be technicals!

Something more should happen that is all I am saying.

Perhaps major fouls would still be red but instead of only being able to get 2 yellows or whatever you get 3 just to have a little punishment for actually committing the foul.

If I go to the bank to rob money but get caught without getting the money I still should be punished. I know bad comparison:)

[ISiddiqui]

I don't see what problems result with the current system.

[RPI-Fan]

Nope I dont mean penalty kick.

Whats to keep them from fouling again? There is no harm to the team that fouls if they dont get a card.

If its so minor then they shouldnt call it.

It would be comparable to calling a foul in basketball when the ball is at the halfcourt line just to have them imbounds the ball again. What exactly is the point?

That is EXACTLY what they do in basketball when you foul at midcourt!!!

[kingnebwsu]

MLB's lack of a salary cap.

NFL's sudden death rule.

The BCS (is that a rule? ;))

[EagleFan]

Ooh, just thought of another one -- NASCAR's frozen field on yellow.

NA$CAR has a bunch that can qualify...


Lucky Dog?

Chase for the Cup?

Chase for the Cup scoring system (if only a certain number of drivers are eligible the scoring should only take their positions in relation to each other into account, why let Joe Blow's team-mate, who is not in the Chase, block Billy Joe Jim Bob, who is in the Chase, from passing to keep him from a couple points).



For golf, how about the signing of the scorecard?



For football, how about that rule where it's illegal to run the ball more than 35 percent of the time? What? That's not a rule? Really?

[bhlloy]

Nope I dont mean penalty kick.

Whats to keep them from fouling again? There is no harm to the team that fouls if they dont get a card.

If its so minor then they shouldnt call it.

It would be comparable to calling a foul in basketball when the ball is at the halfcourt line just to have them imbounds the ball again. What exactly is the point?


Disagree, there is clearly an advantage to having a dead-ball free kick, anywhere on the field. You can kick the ball wherever you want it without any pressure.

I understand what you are saying about the player not getting a penalty, but there is a rule for persistant fouling being a yellow card AND no ref in the universe isn't going to give a card after the 3rd or 4th foul. Pretty consistent with the NBA, IMO.

Oh, and if every foul was a card, there wouldn't be a game. Not sure if you have ever actually watched a soccer game or not...

[SackAttack]

That is EXACTLY what they do in basketball when you foul at midcourt!!!

Only up to a point, though. That's the thing - basketball has both personal fouls and team fouls. Soccer, AFAIK, has no such thing. At least, not that impacts the team in a particular game (as opposed to in an overall way; I think SirFozzie was telling me over AIM that if a team racks up 5+ yellows in a game, they get called on the carpet).

[bhlloy]

Here's my problem with offside, and the reason I don't like it much.

In hockey, you can pass the puck all around the offensive zone, and as long as the puck stays in the zone, you're not offside.

Soccer, apparently, it's all about where you are relative to the defense at the time the ball is played. So the ball can be played to you legally, you move up into a forward position with it, don't like your shot opportunity, and pass it back toward the center channel. If the defense follows the ball, you have to get back behind the defense before you can legally touch the ball again. What the fuck is that?

I can see not allowing the long balls to cherry-picking forwards, I look at that as akin to the old two-line pass.

But the idea that I can pass the ball to someone else while in legal position and then, WITHOUT MOVING, suddenly be in an illegal position is utter bullshit.

So basically, you are in favour of complicating the rule even more? :)

I don't see the alternative. Hockey zone wouldn't work because the field is so much larger. Any other solution adds complexity, and god knows it's called badly enough already.

I also can't think of the last time I was playing or watching and the scenario you are proposing actually happened. It wouldn't make a lot of sense for me to be in a forward position and pass it backwards and then expect the ball straight back. Maybe that's because we have been conditioned to the offside rule, who knows? I guess it does happen at corner kicks some...

[SackAttack]

So basically, you are in favour of complicating the rule even more? :)

I don't see the alternative. Hockey zone wouldn't work because the field is so much larger. Any other solution adds complexity, and god knows it's called badly enough already.

I also can't think of the last time I was playing or watching and the scenario you are proposing actually happened. It wouldn't make a lot of sense for me to be in a forward position and pass it backwards and then expect the ball straight back. Maybe that's because we have been conditioned to the offside rule, who knows? I guess it does happen at corner kicks some...

That's exactly it - you're conditioned to the retarded nature of the rule.

But even so, it's not a matter of expectation. You could be passing the ball just fifteen feet, but if the defense moves back with the pass, it doesn't matter that you haven't moved since passing the ball - you're now in an illegal position. That's what's retarded. You haven't left the attacking zone, the ball could still be generally around the six yard box, but you're now illegally placed. Offside shouldn't be tied to the motion of the defense. That's what I hate.

[bhlloy]

I guess. Propose a workable solution however, that doesn't hugely complicate the original rule.

[Buccaneer]

I think this is mostly done because of poor countries that follow FIFA rules that don't have a clock... that and preventing the scorekeeper from messing with the stoppage timing (as they do in the NFL, NBA, etc).

Poor countries don't have clocks or mechanical time keeping devices?

[SackAttack]

I guess. Propose a workable solution however, that doesn't hugely complicate the original rule.

Simple. If a forward pass crosses the center line, no offensive player may be behind the defence at the time the ball is played across the line.

When either team is on the attack and within the offensive zone, anything goes. If you let the man you're marking get behind the defence without cover, you probably deserve what you get.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Simple. If a forward pass crosses the center line, no offensive player may be behind the defence at the time the ball is played across the line.

When either team is on the attack and within the offensive zone, anything goes. If you let the man you're marking get behind the defence without cover, you probably deserve what you get.
Not a big fan of midfield play, are ya?

[SackAttack]

Not a big fan of midfield play, are ya?

If you've got a better idea, I'm ears.

What would you propose to preserve midfield play without making the legality of offensive play dependent upon what the defense does?

[Pumpy Tudors]

If you've got a better idea, I'm ears.

What would you propose to preserve midfield play without making the legality of offensive play dependent upon what the defense does?
I wouldn't propose anything, as I think the offside rule is fine right now. :)

[SackAttack]

I wouldn't propose anything, as I think the offside rule is fine right now. :)

You also have a thing for Kathy Griffin, so your judgment is suspect. ;)

[ISiddiqui]

For golf, how about the signing of the scorecard?

Oh yes!

Poor countries don't have clocks or mechanical time keeping devices?

They are likely not as accurate as the digital watches of the ref.

[ISiddiqui]

I wouldn't propose anything, as I think the offside rule is fine right now. :)

Agree with Pumpy. I actually LIKE that it is conditioned on defensive positioning. Adds more strategy.

Perhaps a few tweaks, such as deciding who is actually "interfering" with the play and whatnot.

[SackAttack]

Agree with Pumpy. I actually LIKE that it is conditioned on defensive positioning. Adds more strategy.

Okay. So we compromise. If you're going to kill an offensive play based on defensive movement, the defence doesn't get the ball back. Let the offense throw it in from a parallel spot on the sideline.

[RendeR]

Must cross the line of scrimmage, no? Which, the spike also does not do.

You're missing the point of the rule, groundin can only occur when the QB is being rushed and in danger of being sacked. A team has always had the option of throwing an intentional incompletion. The spike is simply the NFL saying "if you want an incomplete pass this is how it must be done" It works perfectly and is a safety play as well since it protects the lineman who would normally be charging headlong at one another for what amounts to a clock stoppage. Sorry, I simply cannot agree with you on this one.

Sudden death OT in any sport.
Penalty shootout, in hockey or soccer.
Rules that should exist:

- In football, any pass that hits the ground before the line of scrimmage, for whatever reason, is a live ball.

- In baseball, there needs to be some rule preventing teams from making excessive pitching changes. The game has become unwatchable to me.

I agree with the sudden death issue, if you're going to play overtime, play the ENTIRE overtime.

I like the use of shootouts for the regular season the fans want to see someone win, no one wants to see a farking tie, ties suck ass.

IF any ball that hits the ground prior to the LoS is live then you will simply see the end of any and all screen/flat type passes. The teams will simply take them out of the game plan entirely as too risky. Its detrimental to the game to eliminate 1/3 of all passing plays. Bad idea.

I can't comment on the baseball piutching thing, honestly baseball as an entertaining sport is dead, has been for 2 decades. They need to strip baseballs anti-trust protections, the commissioner has to put into action a real salary cap, hard, for everyone and the league must engage in worthwhile revenue sharing. otherwise MLB won't exist in aonther 20 years.

Well it might exist but you'll only have 6 teams. Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, Mets and Dodgers.

The Designated Hitter Rule in the American League

Absolutely, its a pathetic rule that takes all the real strategy out of the game.

NA$CAR has a bunch that can qualify...


Lucky Dog?

Chase for the Cup?

Chase for the Cup scoring system (if only a certain number of drivers are eligible the scoring should only take their positions in relation to each other into account, why let Joe Blow's team-mate, who is not in the Chase, block Billy Joe Jim Bob, who is in the Chase, from passing to keep him from a couple points).


Lucky dog I agree, kill it.

The chase is actually a good tihng, I never thought so before but after what? 6 or 8 seasons of it they've shown that it keeps things more interesting. The scoring, number of members in the chase both need to be adressed.

The reason they don't score them in relation to one another is simply "action" doing it your way the racers get into a position where they are safe and then coast home. As it is now each guy can gain points even without passing chase drivers. It creates action on the track and action on the track attracts more fans. Win win.

So basically, you are in favour of complicating the rule even more? :)

I don't see the alternative. Hockey zone wouldn't work because the field is so much larger.

Why wouldn't it work? draw a line across at 40 meters, play it just like hockey does. Makes perfect sense and is simple to officiate.

I wouldn't propose anything, as I think the offside rule is fine right now. :)

Naw, he's right, the initial test for offsides is fine, but once you're in the zone geting boned because the defenders run 10 feet is fucking stupid.

[Young Drachma]

Having pitchers hit is stupid. People who think otherwise, probably don't like DVDs and miss the days of record players and telegraph. They were talking about a DH as early as the 1930s. It just took another 40 years to overcome the Luddites who find some joy in watching pitchers hit .100.

Baseball has tons of problems, but the designated hitter is hardly one of them.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Naw, he's right, the initial test for offsides is fine, but once you're in the zone geting boned because the defenders run 10 feet is fucking stupid.
Not agreeing here.

[RendeR]

Not agreeing here.


Yeah but you live near Pittsburgh and that relegates your opinion to a much lower echelon of relevance. ;)

[Young Drachma]

Yeah but you live near Pittsburgh and that relegates your opinion to a much lower echelon of relevance. ;)

Says the guy in Buffalo?

[ISiddiqui]

Having pitchers hit is stupid. People who think otherwise, probably don't like DVDs and miss the days of record players and telegraph. They were talking about a DH as early as the 1930s. It just took another 40 years to overcome the Luddites who find some joy in watching pitchers hit .100.

Baseball has tons of problems, but the designated hitter is hardly one of them.

For the record, I have a Blu-ray player ;). And yeah, I think the DH is a problem and symptomatic of other baseball problems (short term thinking to "increase interest", like inter-league play and the sort).

[Atocep]

I can't comment on the baseball piutching thing, honestly baseball as an entertaining sport is dead, has been for 2 decades. They need to strip baseballs anti-trust protections, the commissioner has to put into action a real salary cap, hard, for everyone and the league must engage in worthwhile revenue sharing. otherwise MLB won't exist in aonther 20 years.


I think something does need to be done to limit pitching changes in baseball, but I don't get the comment about baseball being dead as an entertaining sport when its at an all time high as far as attendance and revenue goes and its growing at a faster rate than the NFL right now.

All signs that it won't be around in 20 years.

[st.cronin]

The DH I think is kind of like the BCS, its fashionable to bash it but the alternatives are all worse.

[Atocep]

For the record, I have a Blu-ray player ;). And yeah, I think the DH is a problem and symptomatic of other baseball problems (short term thinking to "increase interest", like inter-league play and the sort).

Yeah, I'm anything but a baseball traditionalist and I hate the DH.

[MJ4H]

Pretty regularly injuries occur as a result of that when?!

No, pretty regularly half the team is playing and half the team is stopping because they are unsure if the play is over.



And there is an easier way to avoid "big play because you think the play is over"... it's called "play till the whistle" blows.

You can't always hear the whistle and playing on often results in unnecessary roughness penalties and/or injuries in those cases.



You act like college players don't get up when their knee touches and try to run (thinking they can fool the refs).

No, I don't act like that. It is a different case when one player tries to fool a ref who has blown the play dead than it is when a player is on the ground and it is not clear whether he was touched or not and the ref might or might not have blown the play dead and he gets up running while half the rest of the players think he was down and the other half aren't sure. This happens much more frequently and results in much more confusion on a regular basis. It is a shame that big plays happen as a result of being confused about whether a player is down or not when it should be very clear. And yes, it is almost always clear or very quickly made clear in college when a player gets up and runs after he was down (it doesn't matter if he was touched or not, so that is one less thing that is unclear).

[ISiddiqui]

I think something does need to be done to limit pitching changes in baseball, but I don't get the comment about baseball being dead as an entertaining sport when its at an all time high as far as attendance and revenue goes and its growing at rate faster than the NFL right now.

All signs that it won't be around in 20 years.

I think only fans of the relative sports can post "worst rules" about particular sports from now on ;).

I mean, I can't believe that I read that someone wants to put a line at the 40 yard line of a soccer pitch and make the offsides like hockey.

[RendeR]

Having pitchers hit is stupid. People who think otherwise, probably don't like DVDs and miss the days of record players and telegraph. They were talking about a DH as early as the 1930s. It just took another 40 years to overcome the Luddites who find some joy in watching pitchers hit .100.

Baseball has tons of problems, but the designated hitter is hardly one of them.


If you don't play ON the field you do NOT bat, period. The DH is nothing more than a pathetic excuse to allow players to drag out careers that should have ended 5 years prior.

[st.cronin]

IF any ball that hits the ground prior to the LoS is live then you will simply see the end of any and all screen/flat type passes. The teams will simply take them out of the game plan entirely as too risky.

Those plays SHOULD be eliminated. They're boring.

[RendeR]

Says the guy in Buffalo?


Absolutely. Buffalo Trumps Pitt easily, hell Rochester or even Cleveland Trump Pitt easily. You'd have to be from somewhere like say....Texas, to not be able to trump Pittsburgh...

[RendeR]

Those plays SHOULD be eliminated. They're boring.


Umm...yeah, you just lost pretty much all credibility with me SC ;)

[ISiddiqui]

Absolutely. Buffalo Trumps Pitt easily, hell Rochester or even Cleveland Trump Pitt easily. You'd have to be from somewhere like say....Texas, to not be able to trump Pittsburgh...

What, are you telling me you leave Buffalo during the winter months?

[RendeR]

I think only fans of the relative sports can post "worst rules" about particular sports from now on ;).

I mean, I can't believe that I read that someone wants to put a line at the 40 yard line of a soccer pitch and make the offsides like hockey.


See thats just it, I WAS a fan of baseball. That sad excuse for a show the MLB offers up these days is not what I fell in love with as a kid and enjoyed into my teens and early 20's. Its a sad caricature of a once proud and exciting passtime.

I've always enjoyed Soccer, played it for years. I'm not saying I WANT that type of line added, but its a far better idea than the BS that is the offsides rule as it stands now.

[RendeR]

What, are you telling me you leave Buffalo during the winter months?


this makes no sense at all in this conversation =) wth are you saying? =)

[RendeR]

Buffalo is paradise during the winter.

[JetsIn06]

DH Rule

Amount of playoff teams in NBA and NHL

Alternating possessions in NCAA basketball

Home field advantage for world series determined by all-star game

NFL overtime

[ISiddiqui]

RendeR: Now you've just lost pretty much all credibility ;)

[jbergey22]

Disagree, there is clearly an advantage to having a dead-ball free kick, anywhere on the field. You can kick the ball wherever you want it without any pressure.

I understand what you are saying about the player not getting a penalty, but there is a rule for persistant fouling being a yellow card AND no ref in the universe isn't going to give a card after the 3rd or 4th foul. Pretty consistent with the NBA, IMO.

Oh, and if every foul was a card, there wouldn't be a game. Not sure if you have ever actually watched a soccer game or not...


You're right never seen a game, whats soccer?

[RendeR]

RendeR: Now you've just lost pretty much all credibility ;)


Feh, people honestly don;t know how terrific Buffalo is. The only real problem here is a lack of jobs. There are jobs, just not enough to bring more people in.

There a hundred reasons to love Buffalo, the only thing anyone ever really bitches about is the weather and our weather is better than most Northeastern cities.

[RendeR]

DOLA,, forgot to add a smiley ;)

[ISiddiqui]

So... lack of jobs and lots of snow... yeeeeaah *backs away slowly*

[Young Drachma]

So... lack of jobs and lots of snow... yeeeeaah *backs away slowly*

+1

[EagleFan]

Having pitchers hit is stupid. People who think otherwise, probably don't like DVDs and miss the days of record players and telegraph. They were talking about a DH as early as the 1930s. It just took another 40 years to overcome the Luddites who find some joy in watching pitchers hit .100.

Baseball has tons of problems, but the designated hitter is hardly one of them.

You could not be more wrong. Pitchers are on the field and in the game so they hit. Why stop at pitchers? Put 9 players on the field who specialiaze at defense and have 9 designated hitters. Why not take it all the way?

[Grammaticus]

Rules that should exist:

- In football, any pass that hits the ground before the line of scrimmage, for whatever reason, is a live ball.


This would actually be really cool in conjunction with no intentional grounding penalties at all. The QB should be able to throw the ball away to avoid a sack. Just better make sure it makes it past the LOS. Then add if you throw the ball out of bounds (not touched by any player) behind the LOS, it is a ten yard penalty.

[CU Tiger]

You could not be more wrong. Pitchers are on the field and in the game so they hit. Why stop at pitchers? Put 9 players on the field who specialiaze at defense and have 9 designated hitters. Why not take it all the way?

So baseball players hit the ball their entire lives, little league, pony league, high school, college but when they get to the pros they forget how? We all agree that today's (NL) pitchers cant hit. But if they had to practice it everyday and their job depended on it they would learn...

[ISiddiqui]

If we have the Designated Hitter, I wonder why we don't have a Designated Fielder? I mean, people say that no one wants to see a pitcher hit, but I'm positive that no one (and I mean NO ONE) wants to see Manny Ramirez field LF.

In addition, why just a DH for pitchers? I mean, there are plenty of other great players on the defensive side of the ball (which is what pitchers are - defense) who can't hit worth a lick. Even though he had a few key hits in the playoffs, you don't think the Rays wouldn't mind having a DH for Jason Bartlett, their great fielding, bad hitting SS?

[Grammaticus]

The DH rule is rediculous and results in an increased number of bean balls (hitting batters).

Get rid of it. Having to decide whether or not to pull a pitcher in order to pinch hit is a part of the strategy of the game.

[Young Drachma]

If we have the Designated Hitter, I wonder why we don't have a Designated Fielder? I mean, people say that no one wants to see a pitcher hit, but I'm positive that no one (and I mean NO ONE) wants to see Manny Ramirez field LF.

In addition, why just a DH for pitchers? I mean, there are plenty of other great players on the defensive side of the ball (which is what pitchers are - defense) who can't hit worth a lick. Even though he had a few key hits in the playoffs, you don't think the Rays wouldn't mind having a DH for Jason Bartlett, their great fielding, bad hitting SS?

I'm fine with more specialization in baseball, because it'd just mean more jobs for players who otherwise wouldn't get to play. But I realize that's heresy to most folks. So in that sense, your argument doesn't really go anywhere.

That said, I almost always make my OOTP without the DH. I can appreciate baseball with it and would be fine with it if the rule was reversed to neither league had the DH or both had it, but the way it is now is silly having the same sport play under two sets of rules.

Just seems a bit ridiculous and yet...it keeps chugging along.

[BishopMVP]

I mean, people say that no one wants to see a pitcher hit, but I'm positive that no one (and I mean NO ONE) wants to see Manny Ramirez field LF.Speak for yourself. Without Manny in LF we never would have gotten him cutting off Johnny Damon's throw to the relay guy, or his inexplicable double somersault on top of the ball this summer, or his catch/high-fiving a fan/assist at 1B.

It may not be well played, but it's certainly a lot more exciting than watching Greg Maddux get up and stand with the bat on his shoulder for 3 straight fastballs.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Welp, I guess I'm done here.

[whomario]

Amount of playoff teams in NBA and NHL



Too many ? If that´s what you mean : With less PO teams and the current large schedules the season would loose a lot more appeal much earlier with more team headed for the lottery earlier in the year and starting to tank or "experiment" ...

But on a similar note :

There´s too damn many games in the regular season. 60 games should be way enough.
This would mean more at stake for every single game, more practice time in between games, less fatigue, less injuries and all that making for a higher level of play overall.

[Buccaneer]

DH. National League >>>>> American League.

Any leagues that allow teams at or below .500 into the post-season.

Automatic bids for conference tourney winners into the NCAA bracket.

[Pumpy Tudors]

This doesn't really fit in with the "worst rules in sports," but my wife had an idea that I could actually be talked into. Of course, in hockey, if a team gives up a powerplay goal, their penalized player gets to leave the box if it was a minor penalty. Well, how about a shorthanded team being able to "earn" their player out of the box by scoring a goal? I wouldn't be against that.

[Logan]

Figured this article is perfect for this thread:

Obscure NFL rules baffle teams, sometimes the refs - NFL - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-namethatrule&prov=ap&type=lgns)

[molson]

You could not be more wrong. Pitchers are on the field and in the game so they hit. Why stop at pitchers? Put 9 players on the field who specialiaze at defense and have 9 designated hitters. Why not take it all the way?

Is there a name for this kind of retort because I find it hillarious and an FOFC staple. "Ya, if you're for this it follows that you're for everything extreme in that direction".

9 specalized defense players and 9 designated hitters is quite different than 1 DH for (most often) the pitcher. I no idea what your point is.

[DanGarion]

One rule that has always bothered me - sacrifice flies in baseball. We're all used to them, but the concept of not leaving a base until the ball is caught is a little bizarre. Either the ball being caught should end the play, or not.

WHA?!! :confused: :confused:

[Young Drachma]

I actually could be fine with that. It would open up the game quite a bit, if you didn't have to sit on base and wait for a ball to be caught to run and could run whenever. It'd probably make baseball look like Pesäpallo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pes%C3%A4pallo) but...a more exciting game wouldn't be the worst idea ever.

[JetsIn06]

Too many ? If that´s what you mean : With less PO teams and the current large schedules the season would loose a lot more appeal much earlier with more team headed for the lottery earlier in the year and starting to tank or "experiment" ...

But on a similar note :

There´s too damn many games in the regular season. 60 games should be way enough.
This would mean more at stake for every single game, more practice time in between games, less fatigue, less injuries and all that making for a higher level of play overall.

Yea, too many in my opinion. No team with a losing record should ever be able to play in the playoffs. It's ridiculous.

In the NBA, more teams make the playoffs the miss it. That's not good, IMO.

[molson]

Yea, too many in my opinion. No team with a losing record should ever be able to play in the playoffs. It's ridiculous.

In the NBA, more teams make the playoffs the miss it. That's not good, IMO.

I really afraid that if we see an 8-8 Chargers team get in over an 11-5 Pats team, there will be calls to expand the NFL playoffs to 14 or god forbid, 16 teams. 8-8 playoff teams would be the norm, and 7-9 wouldn't be unusual.

[ISiddiqui]

Is there a name for this kind of retort because I find it hillarious and an FOFC staple. "Ya, if you're for this it follows that you're for everything extreme in that direction".

reductio ad absurdum

9 specalized defense players and 9 designated hitters is quite different than 1 DH for (most often) the pitcher. I no idea what your point is.

It's just the logical end of the argument.

[molson]

reductio ad absurdum

It's just the logical end of the argument.

But can't someone have this as their order of preference?

1. DH
2. No-DH
..
...
..
500. 9 designated fielders and 9 designated hitters.

Is #500 really any closer to #1 than #2? It just seems like an obnoxious point...Sure, I like the DH, but I'd rather have pitchers try to hit than the "logical end of the argument".

[Galaril]

+3 (are we up to 3) on the instigator. Especially when it's applied so arbitrarily. Also, although haven't seen it called for awhile, the game misconduct for not having your jersey tied down.

In the NFL, I'd never seen it until this past weekend when Aaron Smith got called for unsportsmanlike for "simulating the snap count". WTF! I guess they are saying that is too deceptive...isn't that what offenses are trying to do to defenses all the time!?
And one that has always bothered me-- spiking the ball to stop the clock. If that same "throw" occurs while a defensive player is running towards the QB, people will be howling for intentional grounding. Call it the same way all the time.

No that is same as the NBA coach I think it was the Knicks a few weeks ago screaming in the ear of the player as he launched a 3point shot at the buzzer.So it is more akin to cheating than good strategy or pussy play at best. Anyways that isn't the reason the Steelers lost that game.

[ISiddiqui]

I'd rather have pitchers try to hit than the "logical end of the argument".

But it's not. It's stopping short. So the question becomes why make a change that you're going to stop after one step? It's like how the US Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore that the ruling was never supposed to be used again.

[Suburban Rhythm]

No that is same as the NBA coach I think it was the Knicks a few weeks ago screaming in the ear of the player as he launched a 3point shot at the buzzer.So it is more akin to cheating than good strategy or pussy play at best. Anyways that isn't the reason the Steelers lost that game.

I know that's not why the Steelers lost.

That reasoning reminds me of during the Steelers Super Bowl year, Joey Porter said the Colts could not beat the Steelers playing football (the Colts killed them in a regular season game in the RCA Dome), accused the Colts of having to use gimmicks etc to win.

How is that much different than the offense using a hard count to try and draw the D offsides? I guess you could argue "good strategy", but I'd argue that falls into the other category.

Or, what the Steelers used to do with Kordell-- the have him walk away from the shotgun towards the sideline, appearing to call a TO, then direct snap to the RB. I don't see how that is any different, in it's a "strategy" to deceive the D and gain an advantage.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Absolutely. Buffalo Trumps Pitt easily, hell Rochester or even Cleveland Trump Pitt easily. You'd have to be from somewhere like say....Texas, to not be able to trump Pittsburgh...

Dola

Quoting the great Patty Roy -- I can't hear what you are saying about Pittsburgh with these 2 Stanley Cup rings in my ears.

:p

When's the last time Buffalo won anything? AFC Championship games don't count.

[Galaril]

I know that's not why the Steelers lost.

That reasoning reminds me of during the Steelers Super Bowl year, Joey Porter said the Colts could not beat the Steelers playing football (the Colts killed them in a regular season game in the RCA Dome), accused the Colts of having to use gimmicks etc to win.

How is that much different than the offense using a hard count to try and draw the D offsides? I guess you could argue "good strategy", but I'd argue that falls into the other category.

Or, what the Steelers used to do with Kordell-- the have him walk away from the shotgun towards the sideline, appearing to call a TO, then direct snap to the RB. I don't see how that is any different, in it's a "strategy" to deceive the D and gain an advantage.

Those are valid counter arguements. Hopefully we can get a rematch in the AFC Championship and settle matters on the field once again.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Those are valid counter arguements. Hopefully we can get a rematch in the AFC Championship and settle matters on the field once again.

Fingers crossed.

Tennessee was still the better team that day, without that call.
So it wasn't so much bitterness against TEN. That call is just really ridiculous.

[Big Fo]

- BCS system for college football

- NFL players needing two feet in bounds for a catch

- the one and one rule in college hoops, just make it all double bonus

- NBA teams being able to trade a player while making an agreement that the other team cuts said player who then resigns with the team who traded him

- any player who leaves the bench in an NBA scuffle is suspended, it's ruined at least one playoff series

- NFL refs constantly punishing celebrations and big hits

- the 90 minute rule in English soccer, where if a club wants to sign a youngster, they must live within 90 minutes of the club's training ground. Biased towards more densely populated areas (London clubs in particular)

- away goals rule in soccer

- MLS playoffs. more games in the quarterfinal round than in the semi-final and final? really?

- MLB playoffs, make the first round a best of seven. best of five is a joke after a 162 game season.

[Bad-example]

NFL - Helmet radios. These need to go away quick. Sending in plays from the sidelines with semaphore signals was the flavor of the game. The radios just add complications when they break down or when crowd noise renders them ineffective. Kill off the radios and let the backup quarterback have his signaling duties back.

[OldGiants]

I think the worst rules in all sports are the ones that require cheerleaders (under 130 pounds, of course) to wear uniforms.

[Crim]

In college ball, catching a kickoff, getting one foot inbounds and other out of bounds. This is somehow ruled as kicking the ball out of bounds, and is called against the kicking team. Receiving team gets the ball on their 40, instead of where the returner stepped out of bounds.

wtf seriously.

[EagleFan]

In college ball, catching a kickoff, getting one foot inbounds and other out of bounds. This is somehow ruled as kicking the ball out of bounds, and is called against the kicking team. Receiving team gets the ball on their 40, instead of where the returner stepped out of bounds.

wtf seriously.

Didn't realize that. Really odd, especially since the legal catch rule is one foot.


I just thought of another. When you score a touchdown and there is a penalty which get marked off from the end of the play causing your next play to begin from inside the end zone. That one causes Maximum Frustration. ;)

[stevew]

I thought of one. Offense has the ball first and goal from the 6. Defense goes offside clear path to the QB. Play blown dead ball marked half the distance. First and goal from the 3. Next snap the left guard false starts. Its now first and goal from the 8. Wtf. Both are 5 yard infractions.

[SackAttack]

I thought of one. Offense has the ball first and goal from the 6. Defense goes offside clear path to the QB. Play blown dead ball marked half the distance. First and goal from the 3. Next snap the left guard false starts. Its now first and goal from the 8. Wtf. Both are 5 yard infractions.

Works the same way in reverse. First and ten from my own 3, defensive offsides moves me to the 8, false start from the 8 moves me to the 4.

It may be stupid, but at least it's consistent.

[stevew]

In college ball, catching a kickoff, getting one foot inbounds and other out of bounds. This is somehow ruled as kicking the ball out of bounds, and is called against the kicking team. Receiving team gets the ball on their 40, instead of where the returner stepped out of bounds.

wtf seriously.

Same rule in the NFL. If the returner has one foot out of bounds and touches the ball it moves to the 40 too. Leon Washington did it a few weeks ago

[Atocep]

Didn't realize that. Really odd, especially since the legal catch rule is one foot.


Well, if you catch a pass with one foot out of bounds it doesn't matter if you get the other foot in.

[Nugget699]

Having a "Blue Line" in Soccer is probably the single stupidest idea I've ever heard. It will never work because the skill of the Goalie will be totally void. In Hockey for example, The Goalie is so close to the net, and the net so small that a player can be 2 feet away from the goal and still miss or have his shot saved. Yet in Soccer, due to the Goal being so big, the Goalie has to come off his line and close down the angle. If we allow Strikers to go charging in and stand where ever the hell they want we are going to get games with double figure scorelines constantly. All the Midfield will do is hog the ball outside the box, draw out a couple of Defenders then lob it over to the 2-3 players STANDING ON THE GOAL LINE and just tap it home, making the Goalie almost completely irrelevant. Why have a screaming from 35 yards when you can pass it to your team-mate half an inch from goal line?

I agree the Offside rule is bag of shit, yet If they were to introduce the "Blue Line" idea, I think it shouldn't be allowed inside the penalty area. Therefore, allowing many 1-on-1 situations, yet the Goalie still has a good chance of coming off his line and closing down the angle.

[BYU 14]

Hockey - Instigator rule - This has ruined the ability of the sport to self police and made play even chippier because it's hard to hold players accountable. 2 through 10 - See rule 1

[Taur]

The NFL rule that says a coach is only allowed 2 challenges. And , that is even applied if he wins both challenges. I understand that if you lose challenge you lose a time out, but when you win a challenge they don't charge you a timeout, but why don't you get the right to challenge back also for proving the refs got it wrong?


Once you have proven the officials wrong twice in a game they can screw you over for the rest of the game with bad calls and there will be nothing you can do about it? Crazy.

[EagleFan]

Well, if you catch a pass with one foot out of bounds it doesn't matter if you get the other foot in.

I was reading that as one foot in and the other lands out which is a catch. If the foot was already out than I see it not being a catch but that still doesn't seem like it should be used to rule for kicks as you are giving the receiving team the power to "create" a penalty.

[Pumpy Tudors]

The NFL rule that says a coach is only allowed 2 challenges. And , that is even applied if he wins both challenges. I understand that if you lose challenge you lose a time out, but when you win a challenge they don't charge you a timeout, but why don't you get the right to challenge back also for proving the refs got it wrong?


Once you have proven the officials wrong twice in a game they can screw you over for the rest of the game with bad calls and there will be nothing you can do about it? Crazy.
If you win both of your challenges, don't they give you an extra one? I can't remember for sure. I might be making that up.

[ISiddiqui]

No, I think you are right on that.

[Suburban Rhythm]

If you win both of your challenges, don't they give you an extra one? I can't remember for sure. I might be making that up.

That's what I thought too as I was reading that. If your first 2 challenges are in your favor, you receive a 3rd challenge (assuming you've got timeouts left to "wager" against that challenge).

I guess in his theory, after 3 times, you'll still be screwed over by the refs. But if the refs make that many bad calls, you won't see them again later in the season (I hope).

[Young Drachma]

And I like the idea of 3 challenges, equal to the number of timeouts.

[SackAttack]

Having a "Blue Line" in Soccer is probably the single stupidest idea I've ever heard. It will never work because the skill of the Goalie will be totally void. In Hockey for example, The Goalie is so close to the net, and the net so small that a player can be 2 feet away from the goal and still miss or have his shot saved. Yet in Soccer, due to the Goal being so big, the Goalie has to come off his line and close down the angle. If we allow Strikers to go charging in and stand where ever the hell they want we are going to get games with double figure scorelines constantly. All the Midfield will do is hog the ball outside the box, draw out a couple of Defenders then lob it over to the 2-3 players STANDING ON THE GOAL LINE and just tap it home, making the Goalie almost completely irrelevant. Why have a screaming from 35 yards when you can pass it to your team-mate half an inch from goal line?

I agree the Offside rule is bag of shit, yet If they were to introduce the "Blue Line" idea, I think it shouldn't be allowed inside the penalty area. Therefore, allowing many 1-on-1 situations, yet the Goalie still has a good chance of coming off his line and closing down the angle.

Yeah. I don't know if I want a blue line, exactly, but I don't like the offside rule one bit as currently written.

[kcchief19]

There is nothing about the implementation of replay at any level of football I like. College at least has it halfway right in that they have a replay official who can review any plan and you don't have to have the team worrying about whether or not to challenge. That's just nonsense. And why tie time outs to replays? The goal appears to be to penalize teams for being wrong so why not penalize them 10 yards if they don't have any timeouts left? And we haven't even gotten into the fact that only some types of plays can be challenged and others cannot.

[kcchief19]

I think this is mostly done because of poor countries that follow FIFA rules that don't have a clock... that and preventing the scorekeeper from messing with the stoppage timing (as they do in the NFL, NBA, etc).
If your country can't afford a decent clock, you have no business playing soccer at an international level.

But that's not the reason -- it's just a stupid tradition. Technically the clock never stops in soccer, but the referee has the authority to add time at his/her discretion. There's no need for Swiss timing for that. That could be done by somebody else. Putting it on a scoreboard and making it "official" would remove the hanky panky. Right now, one person has the authority to let the game go as long as they want with no one knowing what the time is.

Soccer is the only game with a clock where only one person knows when the game will end. Bizarre.

[stevew]

I'd like to see the NFL overtime changed to the first team scoring 6 points wins. Sure you'll have one possession periods still but its better than someone getting a cheap FG and winning. I hate how important the coin toss is.

[stevew]

If your defensive line is getting winded it is a lot better to do a stupid challenge and lose a timeout than to just call the timeout. It seems like you get much more time with a challenge.

[stevew]

You need to be able to challenge defensive pass inreference, roughing the kicker/passer and grounding. They are fucking critical game changing calls and need to be reviewable

[molson]

I'd like to see the NFL overtime changed to the first team scoring 6 points wins. Sure you'll have one possession periods still but its better than someone getting a cheap FG and winning. I hate how important the coin toss is.

I agree. Guaranteeing each team once possession still makes the coin toss critical. I don't know what the bigger advantage is - getting the ball first in the NFL system or getting the ball last when you guarantee each team a possession.

First to 6 points is a great balance. If you score a TD off the bat, you deserve to win. If you can only get a FG, you're the giving the advantage back to the other team to win.

[Buccaneer]

If your country can't afford a decent clock, you have no business playing soccer at an international level.

But that's not the reason -- it's just a stupid tradition. Technically the clock never stops in soccer, but the referee has the authority to add time at his/her discretion. There's no need for Swiss timing for that. That could be done by somebody else. Putting it on a scoreboard and making it "official" would remove the hanky panky. Right now, one person has the authority to let the game go as long as they want with no one knowing what the time is.

Soccer is the only game with a clock where only one person knows when the game will end. Bizarre.

I fully agree with that. That's one of several reasons why I do not like soccer at all. By the way, how is this handled in a text sim?

[gstelmack]

I didn't catch everything in the thread, but aside from palming / travelling that are never called, the dumbest rule in the NBA is "call a timeout, get the ball at the other half of the court" that allows a team to call timeout after a made shot with 0.8 seconds left on the clock and get to inbound near the other team's basket for a desperation heave. You should ALWAYS have to move the ball the length of the court. The only time you should inbound in the other team's half is after moving it across the halfcourt line.

[stevew]

I would assume the half court advance rule was put in place for TV. That way they get to run a shitload of commercials in what's probably the most viewed part of the game. I'm interested when the rule was created and for what reasons other than TV.

[jbergey22]

I'd like to see the NFL overtime changed to the first team scoring 6 points wins. Sure you'll have one possession periods still but its better than someone getting a cheap FG and winning. I hate how important the coin toss is.


This is something I had never thought of but a fantastic idea that would fix much of the problem

[terpkristin]

This is something I had never thought of but a fantastic idea that would fix much of the problem

Agreed. I waffle on which OT rules I hate more, pro or college. Usually it ends up being pro, as there's too much reliance on what amounts to a 50-50 coin toss.

/tk

[Surtt]

If your country can't afford a decent clock, you have no business playing soccer at an international level.

But that's not the reason -- it's just a stupid tradition. Technically the clock never stops in soccer, but the referee has the authority to add time at his/her discretion. There's no need for Swiss timing for that. That could be done by somebody else. Putting it on a scoreboard and making it "official" would remove the hanky panky. Right now, one person has the authority to let the game go as long as they want with no one knowing what the time is.

Soccer is the only game with a clock where only one person knows when the game will end. Bizarre.

Rugby did the same thing, at least at the club level.
In a strange way it was kind of fun. It added a sudden death feel to the end of close games.
You knew you were on borrowed time, but not how much you had...

[MIJB#19]

- the 90 minute rule in English soccer, where if a club wants to sign a youngster, they must live within 90 minutes of the club's training ground. Biased towards more densely populated areas (London clubs in particular)But isn't the densely populated areas argument nullified by the trend of densely populated areas also having more soccer clubs, making the competition for said player bigger? The real disadvantage is there for the youngesters themselves as those living near the coastline or inside terrible infrasturctured areas have less options.

[MrDNA]

I'd like to see the NFL overtime changed to the first team scoring 6 points wins. Sure you'll have one possession periods still but its better than someone getting a cheap FG and winning. I hate how important the coin toss is.

This is, quite simply, the best overtime proposal I have ever heard. What's really weird is that I've never heard it before. SteveW for commish! :)

[dervack]

How about, as long as the player is stopped for a first down, you can't challenge the spot? Even if were talking a 2 yard difference?

[MJ4H]

This is, quite simply, the best overtime proposal I have ever heard. What's really weird is that I've never heard it before. SteveW for commish! :)

I liked the one where the coaches bid for starting field position and the one that bids the farthest away gets possession first.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I liked the one where the coaches bid for starting field position and the one that bids the farthest away gets possession first.
Sounds like a weird version of "Name That Tune."

"I can score from 40 yards away."
"I can score from 45 yards away."
"I can score from 50 yards away."
"OK. SCORE THAT TOUCHDOWN!"

[DeToxRox]

Sounds like a weird version of "Name That Tune."

"I can score from 40 yards away."
"I can score from 45 yards away."
"I can score from 50 yards away."
"OK. SCORE THAT TOUCHDOWN!"

Fuck Pumpy made me chuckle.

I still hate you for making Hot Chocolate my girlfriends favorite drink.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Fuck Pumpy made me chuckle.

I still hate you for making Hot Chocolate my girlfriends favorite drink.
So she told you "Hot Chocolate" was a drink, huh? Ah, I have that girl very well trained. :)

[DeToxRox]

So she told you "Hot Chocolate" was a drink, huh? Ah, I have that girl very well trained. :)

It's okay .. ask your wife about the Skinny Half Caf.

Er.

[MJ4H]

Sounds like a weird version of "Name That Tune."

"I can score from 40 yards away."
"I can score from 45 yards away."
"I can score from 50 yards away."
"OK. SCORE THAT TOUCHDOWN!"

That is pretty much exactly it.

[Logan]

So she told you "Hot Chocolate" was a drink, huh? Ah, I have that girl very well trained. :)

If there was ever anything that could replace "bounty hunter" as your custom...

[Honolulu Blue]

NASCAR has a lot of silly rules, so I'll just ignore those.

My picks (the first three don't exist anymore, but they were silly while they lasted):

* Halo rule (NCAAF)
* In the grasp (NFL)
* Illegal zone (NBA)
* Defensive indifference (MLB)
* Illegal celebration rules (football)
* Overtime (NCAAF)

BTW, I don't mind the DH and I kinda like the sudden death rule in the NFL.

[DaddyTorgo]

whatever rule in the NBA allows Portland's basket with 6 men on the court to count (just happened in the trailblazers-celtics game)

[Crim]

I was reading that as one foot in and the other lands out which is a catch. If the foot was already out than I see it not being a catch but that still doesn't seem like it should be used to rule for kicks as you are giving the receiving team the power to "create" a penalty.

Yes, EF, you read my intent correctly. I'd never seen this before, then oddly enough it happened twice to the Gators this year. Once against Alabama, and I am blanking on who the first one was against.

[Crim]

If you go to the 55 minute mark, you'll see it. Even the LSU announce team thought Florida got jobbed.

JTV (http://www.lsusports.net/newMediaPlayer/console.htm?type=vod&oemid=5200&id=148183&ATCLID=1601408&DB_MENU_ID=&SPSID=27815&SPID=2164&DB_OEM_ID=5200&CLIP_ID=143518&CLIP_FILE_ID=148183)

[Fighter of Foo]

This is, quite simply, the best overtime proposal I have ever heard. What's really weird is that I've never heard it before. SteveW for commish! :)

It will result in a LOT more ties and Americans don't like ties. See my least favorite rule, the NHL shootout. Not only do I hate the shootout on principle, but they don't even divide up the points properly.

[larrymcg421]

My NFL OT proposal

1) Each team gets guaranteed a possession, which they get by receiving a kickoff.

2) No coin toss. Home team gets 2nd possession in the first OT.

3) There is no punting.

4) If you don't score, then the officials mark the yard line you reached.

5) The next team either has to beat the score of the previous team or pass the yard line the other team reached.

6) If the game is won by the yard line rule, it will be reported as a 1 pt. victory.

7) If both teams score the same, then we repeat from rule #1, but the the order of possession will switch.

8) Ties suck. Man up and keep playing until someone wins.