|
What's new, or different, about someone figuring out a way to exploit a rule? I'm not a proponent of this "A-11 offense", but neither do I think it's a plague going to destroy civiliazation. If, and it's still a big "IF", this strategy has an overtly negative effect on the game, rule revisions may become necessary, but it seems there's still a significant distance between "now" and "if".
Will this offense create unsurmountable difficulties for defenses and officials? I certainly don't know. One can draw a picture of a beautiful woman, but most won't find making love to the picture very satisfying.
This offense seems to rely, heavily, on discipline and timing at an exceptionally high level and the presumption of a defensive alignment being confused and rendered impotent by hesitation. Officials help balance the perspective by understanding, observing and strictly enforcing the alignment, shift and motion rules and defenses can add to the balance by maintaining focus and flexibility, acting as a unit and developing effective countermeasures, something they have been doing as a matter of routine for 100 years.
Creativity has long been a process of trial and error, and far more "new ideas" fail than succeed, under their own weight than regulatory edict. Before new rules are issued, isn't it reasonable to determine whether the existing rules are sufficient to handle what for now, is still a perceived problem.
|