Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc
Have you considered that NFHS rules govern a game involving serious competitive physical contact, complicated tactical interactions and the maturity to prioritize group over personal objectives for players between the formative ages of 8 and 17-19
Whereas NCAA rules govern the same type of interwoven challenges between young men (upper teens-mid/late 20s) entering the next level of human development, the majority of whom have likely been exposed to, trained and experienced the game, to some extent, having progressed through that initial stage and are exposed to a radically larger venue, with totally different responsibilities and objectives .
Why are you surprised that there would be applied incremental adjustments created for the considerably different physical conditions, mental development, experience and maturation of these participants ?
Climbing to the next level in the exceedingly steep physical, skill and mental focus of the Football pyramid, which includes an entirely different objective and reward and responsibility formula and benefit, played by fully grown men at the apex of physical development creates even wider, and different priorities.
Why would you even consider one absolute standard could properly service such dispirit environments equally?
|
I'm not surprised by any of these things. What vexes me is that in recent years Fed in football has frequently adopted rules language that attempted to achieve the same effect as recent changes by NCAA, but put it in ways that make them harder to administer or do strange things. What I'm thinking about is the rules governing the left-right formation or motion of players on the team making a free kick, and also the technique of such a kick. NCAA had addressed those problems fairly simply and equitably, but Fed rather than adopting those exact provisions made in one case language that makes the officials' job hard for no good reason (watching the motion of players left and right relative to the kicker, rather than just referencing the spot of the ball, as they approach the free kick line) and in the other case kills play inequitably.
The
substance of the rules should take into acc't the desires of the players at the level they'll play the game. The
style in which the rules are written should reflect those desiderata too.
Originality is not a virtue here. All the major codes are based on the wording of a single code adopted long ago; it's not like copyright is in play! You write the rules differently to the extent you want a different effect, not to the extent you want your rules committee to seem kewl & creative.