|
What was the problem this rule was formulated to address, and why was it considered a problem?
The whole business about calling att'n to oneself is silly. The game either has spectators or it doesn't. (I'm used to games that hardly anyone watches -- often not even the substitute players.) If it does, guess what?
The whole damn game is about people calling att'n!
Hey, look over here, there's a buncha people running around and doing funny stuff that you wouldn't do in polite company! Seriously, could any of these demonstrations that participants do between downs be any more offensive in appearance than football itself?
If there was a problem with taunting that started fights, that justified a rule. But somehow the problem of taunting slid over into demonstrations of emotion of any kind. Could it be that people were seen to take offense at more and more innocent demonstrations? Is this an example of the heckler's veto?
|