The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 09:53am
Broadcaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: LaGrange, Ga.
Posts: 364
Rules that make no sense

On another thread about OPI and DPI, asdf stated:

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
One of many that make absolutely no sense.
Not calling him out specifically, I am just curious. What FED rule(s) do you all find that makes absolutely no sense? And how would you change it?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 11:17am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
I'm not sure it makes no sense, but I've been long opposed to offensive fouls (such as holding) being spot fouls behind the line of scrimmage.

1/10 becomes 1/27 and there's the end of the series for most teams.

I think the NCAA gets this one right. The foul is 10 yards, no more.

I also think the logic behind "if we're not penalizing a LOD on OPI we can't give an AFD on DPI" is tortured, at best. The NCAA/NFL have never had an issue with it, for example. It's not like there weren't examples of other codes, in other words, and the NFHS was breaking new ground.

I'd also eliminate non-PF, non-flagrant, non-USC fouls on scoring plays against the defense. No reason we should penalize 15 on the kickoff for DPI when there's a TD scored on the play. This is one that, to me, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I'd also put an AFD in for all PFs, but that's just something on my wish list.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 11:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 236
I'm with you Rich, on all points!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 12:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 923
I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous. It's not a major issue because it doesn't happen often.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 12:55pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,647
One that was changed this year was the towel rule. Why we had to be the towel police, I'll never know. I understand streamers and tiger tails and all the stupid juvenile "look at me" crap.

However they didn't take it far enough- I understand no ball or penalty flag colors but why if 3 guys have white and 3 guys have black towels does it really matter?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj View Post
I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous.
True, but that would be better dealt with by having as a separate foul (and enforcement) illegal use of hands vs. an eligible receiver while a legal forward pass to him is possible, irrespective of whether the play ends as a running play. In other words, this should be an exception to 3-and-1, while the general case of fouls by the defense should keep that enforcement.

For rules that make no sense, you don't have to look farther than another thread going on now, where one team puts the ball behind the opposing goal line and the opposing team gains possession and fouls there. It "makes sense" in that a fairly simple application of rules produces a safety, but it doesn't make sense in the overall conception of the touchback/safety distinction.

Last edited by Robert Goodman; Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:18pm.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:13pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj View Post
I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous. It's not a major issue because it doesn't happen often.
You just hit on one I forgot.

A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.
Why?

If instead A12 had run 10 yards downfield and fouled there, would you want the penalty on A enforced from the previous spot? Why wipe out the progress of the play up to the time and place of the foul?
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:29pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Why?

If instead A12 had run 10 yards downfield and fouled there, would you want the penalty on A enforced from the previous spot? Why wipe out the progress of the play up to the time and place of the foul?
The tackle was the foul itself. Why should B benefit AT ALL from the illegal tackle?

To answer your question, I would put an exception to the all-but-one in place for a defensive foul on a running play. End of the run beyond the line, tack it on -- previous spot if the run ends behind the line. Hey, B's the team that fouled.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:52pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
You just hit on one I forgot.

A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.
Unless A12 fumbles, then it is from the previous spot...which is crazy.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 02:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 173
Why is the play dead just because a kickoff or punt crosses the goal line ???
__________________
I'm due to make a great call. After all, I've been officiating a long time !!!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 02:48pm
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,049
Why allow a QB "spike" after a hand-to-hand snap, but not when the QB is in the "pistol"?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 03:11pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by REFANDUMP View Post
Why is the play dead just because a kickoff or punt crosses the goal line ???
Safety.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 03:12pm
Broadcaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: LaGrange, Ga.
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
Why allow a QB "spike" after a hand-to-hand snap, but not when the QB is in the "pistol"?
I had forgotten that one. I saw that happen two years ago...and called it right on the air.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 22, 2013, 03:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
Safety.

Peace
Still doesn't make any sense to me. If a punt travels 45 yards into the end zone and is returned, doesn't make it any different than a punt that travels 45 yards and is returned in the middle of the field. Same thing as a kickoff fielded one yard into the end zone being more dangerous to return than a ball fielded on the one yard line.
__________________
I'm due to make a great call. After all, I've been officiating a long time !!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coaches make the rules? bigjohn Football 29 Wed Oct 31, 2012 08:34pm
This doesnt make sense.... CajunNewBlue Softball 13 Fri Jan 09, 2009 08:31am
Finally - pro rules that make sense Mark Padgett Basketball 9 Mon Jun 28, 2004 04:39pm
let's make up rules!!!!! chris s Softball 39 Tue Apr 29, 2003 02:28pm
new rule make sense? crew Basketball 2 Fri Oct 04, 2002 07:34pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1