Dumbest rule in sports

[rusty JEDI]

I am nominating 2.

1. In basketball if the other team scores, and you call a timeout right away you now get the ball at half court. I hate this and dont understand why the team who called the timeout deserves to gain the advantage of moving the ball that ar up court without taking any time off of the clock.

2. Soccer. I never played the game but i was told that you are not allowed to call "mine" or "got it" and instead when calling the ball must say something like "rusty JEDI's ball." It was explained to me that this rule is because it is unethical to call mine because you could confuse the other team. How the hell can a sport with so many pansy Europeans diving when not even touched then roll around for a minute like they are dying begging for a call and then miraculously gettting up to run when the ball comes back their way (and now the europeans have ruined hockey in this manner) have a rule like this for "ethical" reasons. A sport like this has no ethics or sportsmanship in my opinion.

rJ

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
How the hell can a sport with so many pansy Europeans diving when not even touched then roll around for a minute like they are dying begging for a call and then miraculously gettting up to run when the ball comes back their way

[/ QUOTE ]

so true - i got sick of watching the last soccer world cup - a famous aussie rules football player got horribly creamed in a game recently - he had shattered his cheek bone and broken his nose - he barely touched the ground before he jumped to his feet and ran after the ball - aussie rules has a "blood" rule so he had to leave the ground shortly after it happened - he then spent a week in hospital

whats so special about running about kicking a ball that you cant touch with your hands anyway ?

i got more you soccer fans...

i dont like the net cord rule when serving in tennis - if it hits the net it should still count i reckon

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Al_Capone_Junior]

my nomination is in college football where if a runner is 99 yards away from all the defenders, and trips on a beer cup, he's down, and can't get back up and run again, whether the other team touches him or not. I much prefer the man's rule, the NFL rule.

al

[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
How the hell can a sport with so many pansy Europeans diving when not even touched then roll around for a minute like they are dying begging for a call and then miraculously gettting up to run when the ball comes back their way

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called gamesmanship, it's quite a popular tactic in all professional sport I think your find. When your 1-0 up with a minute to go it's a very valid part of the sport, when they are 1-0 up with a minute to go, they are nothing but cheating scumbags /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Homer]

The NFL has a bunch of ridiculous rules. Off the top of my head...

- If a FG attempt is blocked before it reaches the line of scrimmage and the kicking team recovers, they retain possession.

- Tuck rule, enough said.

- If an onside kick attempt goes out of bounds, the kicking team gets another attempt (actually, I think this rule was finally changed).

-- Homer

[Sooga]

Dumbest rule in basketball is a shotclock violation, EVEN IF THE OPPOSING TEAM GAINS POSSESSION. For example, team A has 1 second left on the shotclock, and a player from team A hoists up a shot and the shotclock goes off. Meanwhile, the shot fails to hit the rim, and team B grabs the ball and makes a quick outlet pass. Quick fast break, right? Nope, the play is dead, team B gains possession and has to inbound the ball.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
- If an onside kick attempt goes out of bounds, the kicking team gets another attempt (actually, I think this rule was finally changed).

[/ QUOTE ]

This one was changed.

[M2d]

Any rule (mainly football or basketball) that changes in the last two (or whatever) minutes of the quarter, half or game. Like those minutes count more than the other minutes.

[HDPM]

No it isn't valid and ruins the sport entirely. I know it is a popular sport, the world's most popular, but the way sccer players go about it almost makes soccer a non-sport on the order of figure skating. When a guy rolls around and cries he should have to leave for the rest of the game at least. When they fake it, roll around crying like they will be in the hospital a month, and then play again, it should be a 5 year suspension, 1,000,000 fine, and if ever reinstated they should have to play in a pink dress. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[superleeds]

You havn't really thought this thru.

What if 2 players on opposing teams were re-instated. Pink is too specific, I think you should change 'and if ever reinstated they should have to play in a pink dress' to 'and if ever reinstated they should have to play in a pastel dress which compliments the team strip'.

[superleeds]

At the professional level, the rule in golf where players must sign correct card. They have scorers with them for gods sake, what the hell are they doing.

[Rushmore]

From all sports:

The rule where you may not carry a weapon and attack the opposition with the weapon.

I mean, how stupid is THAT??!

Are you going to tell me that running the bases with a truncheon wouldn't be a better game? Or tennis with a Desert Eagle in your off-racquet hand (although this would eliminate the scintillating 2-handed backhand)?

Hockey would require no changes, obviously.

[Gamblor]

A player gaining possession of a completed pass must "execute a football move" in order to complete the pass.

A "football move"?

What language are they speaking?

[Gamblor]

I always thought that F1 drivers deemed to have driven outside the rules ought to be forced to repaint their teams' liveries in pink, in homage to the worlds worst-driving demographic.

[Oski]

The one in the NFL that requires a team scoring on the final play of regulation to try for a PAT, regardless of whether the came is no longer in doubt.

- I believe this rule was implemented in order to take the choice out of the coach's hands to shield him from accusations related to the betting line. In other words, most coaches (if not all) would just have the team leave the field, but the option was still there to kick the point. God forbid if in the rare event the team goes for the PAT effects the spread, the fingers would be pointed (like they were in the IceBowl where there were accusations that the TD was ordered to cover the spread, when a shord field goal would have ended it).

- Instead of risking injury and needlessly prolonging the game, just have the teams exit the field where the extra point would have no bearing on the game.

[Oski]

Not a huge fan of the baskeball rule that disallows a goal when a player puts the ball in, but has touched the ball while it is touching the rim.

I also think offsides in hockey and soccer serve to make the games less exiting; both games would be better if the players were more spread out and constantly had a scoring threat working near the goal.

Bastardization section: I hate the bar room 8-ball rule that requires a cue-ball scratch to be awarded to the opposing player BEHIND THE STRINGER. The rule is that it should be ball-in-hand. I am not sure how this rule became bastardized, but it can sometimes be advantageous to scratch rather than take a legitimate shot (or try for safety) What smells worse, is that the STRINGER rule usually prohibits one from shooting a ball that is also BEHIND the stringer (unless you bank from the far side). I have played where if you table scratch the 8, you lose...So every time the 8 was behind the stringer for your opponent, the goal would be to scratch and make him bank.

[Oski]

One more for the Brits: Professional darts. Before SPONSORS banned the practice, the players used to be able to smoke and drink (which was pretty much required) during the match. Television sponsors, however, required that this be banned. Now the darts-men (and women) have to go BEHIND a screen, backstage to partake in these libations.

Essentially, sponsors have adopted policies which have changed the flavor of the game.

- Source: Sports Illustrated (10-page, or so feature on darts in Spring, 2001).

[daryn]

i have to agree this is the dumbest thing ever, and it always seems like everyone in the world except me plays like that! it's ball in hand damnit! it should never be advantageous to scratch!

[andyfox]

I still think the college football overtime, which completely changes not the rules, but the way the game is played, is the worst rule in sports.

[M2d]

Whoa, forgot about that one. I change my answer.

[WEASEL45]

The two line pass in hockey

[JTrout]

At the professional level, the rule in golf where players must sign correct card. They have scorers with them for gods sake, what the hell are they doing.

There is NO penalty for signing an incorrect scorecard........ as long as it isn't yours! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Eihli]

You are misinformed about not being able to call "got it" in soccer, at least by FIFA rules.

[ThaSaltCracka]

The worst rule(s) in sports is the strike zone is baseball, which is not enforced under any circumstances.

a close second is not being allowed to use your hands in soccer /images/graemlins/grin.gif Imagine what that would be like.... oh yeah football. That would be sweet!!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[aggie01]

I've never heard of rule #2 (played soccer all my life).

[jstnrgrs]

If you fumble the ball, and it goes out of bounds, your team keeps the ball except when it goes through your opponents endzone.

[jstnrgrs]

One linebacker must stay "in the box" (this effectivley means he cannot play defence.

Defenders are not allowed to be moving toward the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped.

One received may move toward the line at the time the ball is snapped.

If a fumble bounces into the side wall, it is concidered out of bounds. (What's the point of the wall if you are still going to have out of bounds.)

[youtalkfunny]

NFL: O-Lineman is in his stance. D-End comes charging at him before the ball is snapped. D-End is in the neutral zone. But he has not made contact, so he tries to get back on his side of the ball before it is snapped.

O-Lineman comes out of his stance before the ball is snapped.

D-End is successful getting back.

The ball has still not been snapped. Whistles blow, flags fly.

You make the call: Which player is penalized?

*

*

*

*

*

The D-End! His trespassing in the neutral zone "caused" the O-Lineman to jump.

BALONEY! THE O-LINEMAN KNOWS THE SNAPCOUNT! He has no excuse for coming out of his stance.

But the today's version of the rule gives him an excuse.

(I say "today's version", because when I was a kid, this call would go against the offense.)

This rule's sister, the Neil Smith "Stay on your side of the ball, and flinch in an effort to make the O-Lineman jump" rule, is a close second.

[theBruiser500]

Soccer is a great game, no one insult it or you'll have me to deal with.

danny

[PuppetMaster]

Female Sports should all be played in thongs, except the ugly chicks, they dont play period.

[DonWaade]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never heard of rule #2 (played soccer all my life).

[/ QUOTE ]

me too

[DonWaade]

The Instigator Rule in Hockey

[DonWaade]

[ QUOTE ]
I still think the college football overtime, which completely changes not the rules, but the way the game is played, is the worst rule in sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that it changes the game but I like it as an alternative to the OT rules in the NFL. The NFL overtime is the worst overtime rule in all of sports. In the last two years, something like 71% of all NFL games that went to overtime ended after the first possesion. Essentially who ever won the coin toss, won the game.

[Simon Diamond]

You are misinformed about not being able to call "got it" in soccer, at least by FIFA rules.

What are FIFA rules worth? That they have done jack $hit to stamp out this play acting rubbish is making the game a farce. Players pretending to be hurt to get their opponents in trouble, then getting up moments later and sprinting around.

Us English have always prided ourselves on getting straight up after a bad tackle, even if your leg happens to be hanging off. What mugs we are.

Simon

[Simon Diamond]

One more for the Brits: Professional darts. Before SPONSORS banned the practice, the players used to be able to smoke and drink (which was pretty much required) during the match. Television sponsors, however, required that this be banned. Now the darts-men (and women) have to go BEHIND a screen, backstage to partake in these libations.

Essentially, sponsors have adopted policies which have changed the flavor of the game.

This is exactly the same in professional snooker. Whether or not it is a bad thing is open to debate - I personally think it gives the darts and snooker a better image.

They are still games for drunkards in smokey bars of course. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Simon

[slavic]

You all are wrong, you have missed the worst rule of all. Even though it's gone now from CFB, can you say "Halo"?

That rule was so bad nothing can top it.

[ComedyLimp]

The latest version of Law 12 from the official rules says "Any simulating action anywhere on the field, which is intended to deceive the referee, must be sanctioned as unsporting behaviour". Hence any feigning of injury, faking of a foul to gain a free kick or penalty, etc. is punishable by a caution (yellow card) and eventualyl dismissal.

There is no specific rule about shouting "Mine" or "My ball" or "Leave it" but if, say, an attacker shouted such a thing in order to trick the defender into leaving the ball the attacker would be guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct and could be cautioned.

Personally I would introduce a rule that classified preposterous hair as unsportmanlike conduct. This would prevent Italy from winning anything ever again.

However, dumbest rule in any sport is the rule in Cricket where by the batsmen cannot be out LBW to a delivery that pitches outside the line of leg-stump even if the ball would have hit the wicket as long as the batsman makes some token effort to play the ball. I look forward to some insight from our American cousins on this issue.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Tuck rule, enough said.

Since when are you from Oakland? /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

That aside, the NFL tries to take certain types of judgment out of calls. The tuck rule is an example. Simply, if the QB's arm is moving forward and he loses the ball when he's hit, it's an incomplete pass, and the officials are relieved from the responsibility of determining if the forward motion was or was not an attempt to throw.

In the Pats-Raiders game, Brady was obviously not trying to throw the ball. The rule, however, is there for situations where intent is not completely clear.

[AriesRam]

I was watching a college football game one time and during a punt, the defense was called for "roughing the center". Anyone else ever heard of such a thing?

[Whitey]

Well I'm not American but that rule was introduced to stop bowlers from constantly bowling that line,if it wasnt in place there would be no need to place any fielder in the onside field as the leg side would be the only place a batsman could realisticaly hit the ball.(Now our American friends will REALLY be confused /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
I look forward to some insight from our American cousins on this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm......

Was that in English? I've read it three times now, and the more I read it, the less I understand.

[ComedyLimp]

"Was that in English? I've read it three times now, and the more I read it, the less I understand"

The best analogy I can make is if you were allowed to pitch outside the strike zone continually without giving up a walk so that hitter couldn't score but you could only get him out if he was dumb enough to swing.

[ComedyLimp]

"but that rule was introduced to stop bowlers from constantly bowling that line"

Ok I didn't think that out to well. What I meant was, the dumbest rule is whatever combination of rules mean that Robert Croft (say) can spend all day coming round the wicket and pitching it outside off stump knowing that the batsman will just pad it away with his bat neatly tucked behind his pad and whilst you might not get him out he is unlikely to score. Criket is a game of patience and subtlety but there are limits!

[pudley4]

In college football, the defense is not allowed to attack the center/long snapper immediately after he snaps for a kick (punt/FG/PAT). It's for the protection of the center.

In pro football there is no such rule.

[Simon Diamond]

I remember trying to enforce the LBW rule as a youngster, everytime the ball hit someones leg all you would hear from every fielder would be HOWZATTTTT!!!. Yes, even the guy on the cover boundary. Stupid rule.

Re: Robert Croft, they used these tactics on the sub continent and we avoided getting slaughtered so they had some merit. Crap to watch I know, it is much more fun watching someone like Harmy skittling the Windies. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Simon

[Oski]

BASEBALL: This one goes in the bastardation file as well...it is an interpretation, not a rule: The "phantom tag" of second base. I have seen it go to the extreme where the short stop is at least one foot away from the bag, and the out is still registered. This is a pussball way to play. Ty Cobb is rolling in his grave. (Well, he must have been already once the Civil Rights movement was firmly underfoot in the 60's).

[pudley4]

Balk - the pitcher cannot "deceive" the runner (whatever that means), but...

if there is a runner on third, and one on first, the pitcher can step and fake towards third, then turn and throw to first???

How is that not deceiving the runner?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I believe the language once was "...do something common to the game."

That being said, what "football move" did Muhsin MUhammad not do prior to the non-fumble call in the Super Bowl?

[JTrout]

NBA- if you're underneath the basket, and an offensive player takes a run at you, lowers his shoulder, and plows you over- it's blocking foul. No charge.

Baseball- if you foul-tip it straight back into catchers mitt, you are not out UNLESS it's strike 3.

if you strike out but it gets by the catcher, you can RUN to first! You struck out for heaven's sake!

Football- the extra point. Yawn.
- ineligible receiver downfield. If that fat tub of a guy can catch it, more power to him!

Tennis- you touch the net, you lose. And the whole scoring thing-15, 30, 40..... huh?

[Gamblor]

Oh, a move "common to the game".

Of course.

Does adjusting your jock strap count?

[Choven]

I've been subjected to the famous scratch strategy numerous times as well as the classical safety shot where the cue ball is just tapped. The ball-in-hand rule applies to all fouls (scratches, not hitting a ball, not driving a ball to the rail, etc.). Here's a link to the simplified APA rule book for 8 and 9 ball: APA Rules (http://www.poolplayers.com/8-9-ball-Rules.pdf)

[HDPM]

The pool rule is a bastardization of two rules really. In games that aren't ball in hand when you get put behind the string and your only legal ball is behind the string, the ball gets spotted and you shoot a spot shot. But this is bar table 8 ball with idiots you are talking about. They know nothing about pool and you shouldn't play with them. There is always a rules dispute and the morons always win. If you play them for money they won't pay or will fight you, and you can't play for fun because it isn't fun. Don't play bar pool with the idiots is the only solution. They have never played real pool, have never read a rule book, and are apparently incapable of learning.

[John Feeney]

From ComedyLimp: [ QUOTE ]
There is no specific rule about shouting "Mine" or "My ball" or "Leave it" but if, say, an attacker shouted such a thing in order to trick the defender into leaving the ball the attacker would be guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct and could be cautioned.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I have a vague memory of something like that. In most routine situations, though, AFAIK it's fine to say something like "Mine," "I got it," or similar.

Now you soccer dissers put a lid on it. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif Soccer's cool if you get into it and learn about it. As you develop an understanding of the game, watching the better teams becomes pretty interesting.

And it does have a fair amount of contact. You even see enough to give a parent pause in young kids' games. At higher levels I think there's enough to make injuries as much a life problem for players as they are in many other pro sports. Not that that's a good thing. That it's not the Ultimate Fighting Championship does not make it less a sport. And besides all you guys who put it down are a bunch of closet synchronized swimmers. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]


Now you soccer dissers put a lid on it. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif Soccer's cool if you get into it and learn about it. As you develop an understanding of the game, watching the better teams becomes pretty interesting.



[/ QUOTE ]

It's one of the best co-ed sports.

[jstnrgrs]

You must agree that deciding a soccer game with penalty licks is equally dumb.

Insodently, I find it interesting that last year when there ws talk of the NHL using a shootout, everyone said that it would never be used to decide a playoff game. On the other hand, soccer ONLY uses penalty kicks in playoffs.

[jstnrgrs]

I have often wondered what football would be like if there were no ineligible receiver rule, and no requirement that the offence have a certian number of linemen. Surely there would need to be several blockers anyway, so I think they should do away with these rules. I always favor allowing more creativity in sports.

[rusty JEDI]

[ QUOTE ]
if you strike out but it gets by the catcher, you can RUN to first! You struck out for heaven's sake!

- ineligible receiver downfield. If that fat tub of a guy can catch it, more power to him!

[/ QUOTE ]


These two i agree with you very much.

As for the extra point, it can add a little to the game by going for 2.

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
I have often wondered what football would be like if there were no ineligible receiver rule... I always favor allowing more creativity in sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would make it a smidgeon more like soccer. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[jstnrgrs]

If I get leveled its fifteen yards for my team. If not, I can return the ball at least that far. I agree, that was just about the worst rule ever.

I would like to see a slightly different version of the XFL rule. You may signal for a fair catch, but if you do not field the punt, the ball is live. That would be cool.

[jstnrgrs]

you mean all the players would role around on the ground crying the whole game?

[rusty JEDI]

[ QUOTE ]
you mean all the players would role around on the ground crying the whole game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Great reply.

rJ

[John Feeney]

No, that they already do.

Seriously, I meant it would make football less mechanical, freer and more creative, areas in which soccer - with all players allowed to play all over the field in both offensive and defensive roles - has it all over football.

(In the soccer I watch I don't see as much of the acting as I do in football, basketball, etc. Maybe I don't watch enough of the Euro brand; I don't know.)

[ComedyLimp]

"And [Soccer] does have a fair amount of contact"

Yes. Although Football (Soccer) is obviously not a violent game in the way that Football (NFL) is, it is a very tough game. For a start it's physically very demanding both over a game and over a season in much the same sense that Baseball is so you require excellent levels of fitness and conditioning to play for any period of time and to avoid injury. Nobody would call Cal Ripken soft even though he plays what is ostensibly a non-contact sport

"At higher levels I think there's enough to make injuries as much a life problem for players as they are in many other pro sports"

Soccer injuries are generally similar to Basketball and Baseball injuries and the bulk of them are the sort of thing one gets from exerting oneself athletically (so to speak) -- groin strains, hamstrings, ankle sprains, etc. More seriously you also get a fair number of ACL injuries (I was at a match last night and saw a Goalokeeper blow his knee out and get stretchered off) which, just as in the NFL, is the one the players fear as they are often never quite the same again afterwards. It's also a contact sport and the tackles and collisions are violent enough to produce the occasional broken leg, fractured cheekbone, cracked head, etc.

Also don't forget that althogh Soccer does not have an (almost) absolute size requirement in the way NFL does, professional soccer players are still by and large big, strong people. If one were to design a prototypical Soccer player you come up with someone 6ft+, 190Lbs with excellent speed and range and overall body strength. Safetys generally project very well as Soccer players (at least physically) and someone like Miami's soon to be drafted Sean Taylor would be just about ideal.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
ineligible receiver downfield.

[/ QUOTE ]

That reminds me of another rule I was introduced to in this year's Superbowl: Illegal touching!

Brady was under pressure, and threw a screenpass in the vicinity of his RB, who was standing near some OL's who had gotten in position to block. It was a horrible throw, just a dump to avoid the sack, and it hit an OL in the arse.

That's a penalty????

I still laugh at anyone who says they know the rules of the NFL. I've been watching every week for 30 years, and I'm still surprised by obscure rules every now and then.

If you're the same way, don't feel bad. They're the only league that changes a dozen rules each year. That's a lot of new rules introduced in those 30+ years. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[jstnrgrs]

I think a neat idea would give a team an option after they score a touchdown. Either they can take seven points, or they can give up one point and go for two. If they score the conversion, they can either take the 2 or they can give up one point and try for another 2. They could keep doing this until they fail to convert or they elect to take the points.

This way no lead would be insurmountable. What a great game it would be the first time a team down by 10 scores as time runs out then makes three consecutive two point conversions to force overtime.

[Simon Diamond]

(In the soccer I watch I don't see as much of the acting as I do in football, basketball, etc. Maybe I don't watch enough of the Euro brand; I don't know.)

Watch the European Champions League, supposedly the most prestigous club competition in the world. You would be mistaken for thinking it was the Olympic diving competition.

Simon

[JTrout]

This way no lead would be insurmountable. What a great game it would be the first time a team down by 10 scores as time runs out then makes three consecutive two point conversions to force overtime.

I love it!
\

one more stupid rule for my golfing buddies:

Sand is a loose impediment on the green (and therefore may be removed), but is not a loose impediment off the green.

And a pebble is always a loose impediment. At what size does a grain of sand become a pebble?

One more:
You're in your club championship. Riding. Before you tee off, you notice there is one too many clubs in your bag.

You tell your opponent/scorer that you are removing the extra putter out of your bag, taking it out of play, and laying it in the floorboard of your cart.

You'd think that would be sufficient to avoid penalty, right? Wrong. Even if you don't touch that club the rest of the day, you're penalized 4 shots.

[Eihli]

Soccer also only has 1 timeout and you are only allowed to make 3 subs, so most players play the entire hour and a half with only one break. Every other game I can think of, players get plenty of breaks/subs and they don't even run as much as a soccer player int he first place.

[baggins]

all i know is that John Kruk and Candy Maldonado could never play soccer...

[jdl22]

Soccer has 1 timeout only if you consider half time a timeout. There are no timeouts in the usual sense.

[Eihli]

Yeah I guess I should have used break instead of timeout.

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
Soccer also only has 1 timeout

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no time outs in soccer.

[ QUOTE ]
you are only allowed to make 3 subs

[/ QUOTE ]
This actually depends on the competition. In an international "friendly" match, there can be many subs. It depends on what the coaches and officials agree to prior to the game. Many coaches try to evaluate players for upcoming competitions in these matches, and need to get their subs in to see them in game situations. However, if we were talking the World Cup, then you are correct, 3 subs; and 1 is usually saved by the coach in the event the goalie gets hurt. If he is hurt after you've made your 3 subs, then a field player must play goal and you play short a player. This is a DUMB rule, but it is there so players don't fake injuries to get a different player on the field.

Joe

[Eihli]

timeout = break = half-time

[jdl22]

In soccer I think the rules are fine with one exception. If a player is offside (note that the word is singular), the other team gets a free kick from the position where the player was. This allows a team that is getting dominated to go well offside on purpose to bring the ball farther back.

I haven't actually seen this used as a tactic but it is the only hole I can find in rules.

I wouldn't mind seeing something set up to prevent diving/faking injury. Maybe a minimum time off for an injured player would work. If you had to sit off for 5 minutes or be subbed when they bring the stretcher out that would stop a lot of the play acting. It would also help if Fifa (or the national football associations) would suspend players for future matches anytime it's obvious they faked an injury ala Rivaldo at the last world cup.

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
And it does have a fair amount of contact. You even see enough to give a parent pause in young kids' games. At higher levels I think there's enough to make injuries as much a life problem for players as they are in many other pro sports. Not that that's a good thing. That it's not the Ultimate Fighting Championship does not make it less a sport. And besides all you guys who put it down are a bunch of closet synchronized swimmers.

[/ QUOTE ]

John,

I agree 100%. Those who think soccer is not a contact sport has never played it. Keep in mind that hockey players and football players have all sorts of padding on when they play. Soccer players only have shin guards. Now I agree that there is more contact in those sports than soccer, but soccer is definitely a physical sport. If you don't believe me, try stepping on the field in a real game with experienced players sometime. You will gain a whole new appreciation for the sport.

Joe

PS: Loved the book! (Guiltless suckup) /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
timeout = break = half-time

[/ QUOTE ]

A timeout is something a player or coach can CHOOSE to do, not a benefit he/she gains from the structure of the game. If thats the case, then baseball and basketball players get way too many timeouts.

Joe

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
If a player is offside (note that the word is singular), the other team gets a free kick from the position where the player was. This allows a team that is getting dominated to go well offside on purpose to bring the ball farther back.

I haven't actually seen this used as a tactic but it is the only hole I can find in rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

The offside trap is a commonly used defensive tactic in soccer. If you watch soccer on tv, you'll often see the last defensive player "step up" as the ball is being kicked, thus placing the offensive player in an offsides position. I play sweeper on a soccer team (basically the captain of the defense), and it is my responsibility to tell the defense "when" to step up in order to place the opponents in an offsides position. The smart defender uses this tactic as an "additional defender. However, it only works when the referee sees it.

The offense never wants to place itself or be placed in an offsides position because it slows you down, even if you are winning. It also turns the ball over giving the opponent an opportunity to do something. Most teams in the lead in a soccer game will slow the tempo down and play a possession game. Basically, they'd like to play "keep away" in the opponents zone.

Joe

[jdl22]

I'm extremely familiar with offside trapping and so on. What I'm referring to is that a player can go way offside on purpose because the free kick is taken where the offside player was when the ball was kicked, not where the second to last defender was. In a situation where a team is playing super defensive they could use this tactic because it slows the game down and the other team has a free kick from deep in their end. All I'm saying is that the freekick should be taken on the line of the second to last defender.

[jstnrgrs]

First let me say that while I am by no means a soccer fan, I do think that the basic idea of the game is good, and I even enjoy rooting for my country in the world cup. That said, I think that many improvements could be made to the game.

1) Keep the official time on the stadium clock.
2) Stop the clock when the ball is not in play (to prevent teams from stalling). (Also the clock time should be reduced to go with this change.)
3) Make substitutions faster.
4) Eliminate diving. (While I know that there is some diving going on in American sports, at least it is not accompanied by the bad acting.) I sugest that if a player is hurt (or pretending to be hurt), he should be required to leave the field to get medical attention. His team could then either substitute for him, or play short handed while he is checked (which should take at least five minutes). If a player who acts injured then gets back up and playes, he should be yellow carded
5) Speaking of which, there is no penalty for being yellow carded. I suggest that the player be required to leave the field for ten minutes during which time his team would have to play short handed.
6) Never decied a game with penalty kicks. I think they should just keep playing until someone scores. However for those of you who are conserned that the game would go to long, how about this alternative:
At the start of over time, each team would be required to remove one player from the game (so that they are plying ten on ten). Every five minutes there after each team would be required to remove one more player (so they play 10 on 10 for five minutes, then 9 on 9 for five minutes, then 8 on 8 for five nimutes, etc.). Keep doing this until someone scores.

I have several other suggestions, but these are a few of the big ones.

[jdl22]

Keeping time on a stadium clock is done in High School and College in the US (assuming the high schools have a stadium clock). As for stopping the clock when the ball is out of play, in theory the ref should be adding this time on at the end of the half/game assuming there is time wasting going on. If there was 90 minutes of play you would have some tired guys that's for sure. Your acting idea is a good one. It's always funny to see the magic sponge work.

Your extra time idea is certianly original. It would make it much more interesting though I don't think it will be implemented any time soon.

That reminds me of what is much worse than the offside rule I mentioned. The Golden Goal rule. While goals are often hard to come by in soccer they can be the result of a total fluke play much like someone can win with a runner runner flush on occasion. Hence I think it is crazy that a match should end in extra time on a goal. They should just play the 30 minute overtime period out. The silver goal rule is even worse since it doesn't give the benefit of playing the full extra time nor the benefit of the golden goal rule.

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't believe me, try stepping on the field in a real game with experienced players sometime. You will gain a whole new appreciation for the sport.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would add that if you think you're in reasonable cardiovascular shape, try soccer and see how fast you find your limits. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif I suspect soccer players are among the all-around best conditioned athletes out there.

p.s., Joe, hope you don't mind if I email you with a soccer question.

[jdl22]

This goalkeeper situation actually came up in the World Cup. They changed the rule (not sure if they changed it back) so that you could sub the keeper out if all your subs are used up. I believe it was Italy made a bs keeper change swapping a field player for the keeper and then subbed this goalkeeper out. After the next stoppage they made another keeper change and thus got an extra sub on.

[jdl22]

It's not just the players that are so well conditioned. In these matches the referee runs more than most if not all of the players. I was a ref for high school matches and I think I was in better shape then than when I played. I played as a defender and although defenders have to run more than players in other sports it's not as bad as the other field positions.

[jstnrgrs]

I don't mind either the sudden deat format, or playing an extra period (provided that they keep playing extra periods until the game is decided), but I am unfamiliar with the silver goal rule. What is it?

[Simon Diamond]

but I am unfamiliar with the silver goal rule. What is it?

If after 90 minutes the scores are tied in a knockout match, the teams play a 15 minute period of extra time.

If during at the end of that 15 period one of the teams is leading, they win the match. Otherwise, they play another 15 minute period.

It was introduced after it was deemed that the golden goal rule ended matches too prematurely and didn't allow the team conceding the goal any chance of a comeback. The rule makers also suggested that games ending with a golden goal could create safety problems in the crowd.

I believe the silver goal rule is to be phased out in the near future, but the rule tinkerers are sure to come up with more absurd ideas to find a result in tied knockout matches.

Mind you, they used to toss a coin in the early days, so maybe penalty kicks and the like are not as bad as people make out...

Simon

[Gamblor]

If you have a problem with the Golden goal rule, watch any hockey playoff game that goes to overtime.

To me, there is nothing more exciting in sports than overtime in the playoffs.

Entire extra games have been played and they all end in one missed defensive zone coverage or one fluke shot. Game 7 is heart-attack worthy everytime someone touches the puck.

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
What I'm referring to is that a player can go way offside on purpose because the free kick is taken where the offside player was when the ball was kicked, not where the second to last defender was. In a situation where a team is playing super defensive they could use this tactic because it slows the game down and the other team has a free kick from deep in their end.

[/ QUOTE ]
If I understand what you are saying, you are suggesting that the offensive team, which is playing super tight defense, send a forward way offsides in order to give the ball back to the other team with a free kick deep in their zone. If that is correct, and I am interpreting what you are saying correctly, than that is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of in my soccer playing life. As a soccer player, I would absolutely and positively never never never want to freely give the ball to my opponent by running way offsides. Think of it as no-limit hold'em. A main advantage of no-limit hold'em is having a mountain of chips greater than your opponents amount of chips. Those chips are your tools, you need them to win the game. You never want to give any to your opponent, no matter how they get them. In soccer, the chips I speak of is the ball. You never want to voluntarily give the ball away, NEVER. Whether you are ahead or behind, if you have the ball, your opponent can do absolutely nothing. All they can do is try to get the ball back to do what they need to do to win the game. Voluntarily giving them the ball, no matter how deep in their end, is giving away your advantage. This is also the reason why referees allow a player to play on if he is fouled and maintains possession of the ball. It is declared an advantage and play continues uninterrupted. The player has maintained his "advantage" by maintaining possession of the ball despite being fouled.

Never freely give the ball away in soccer. If you want to slow the game down, possess the ball and make your opponent chase it. Its like folding aces preflop against monkeys. (No disrespect to Tommy Angelo /images/graemlins/grin.gif).

Joe

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
p.s., Joe, hope you don't mind if I email you with a soccer question.

[/ QUOTE ]

John,

Feel free to e-mail or PM me with any soccer questions you may have. In my opinion, you may be the poker expert, but my 30 years of coaching, reffereeing, and playing might make me the forum soccer expert. I actually still play today (although I am slightly heaver than my high school/college playing weight /images/graemlins/frown.gif).

Joe

[JoeU]

[ QUOTE ]
This goalkeeper situation actually came up in the World Cup. They changed the rule (not sure if they changed it back) so that you could sub the keeper out if all your subs are used up. I believe it was Italy made a bs keeper change swapping a field player for the keeper and then subbed this goalkeeper out. After the next stoppage they made another keeper change and thus got an extra sub on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't remember this or know if they changed the rule, but it is extremely possible it happened. Is there a way to find out which game it was? I'd be really interested in this. I might have the game on tape. I was in Vegas for the beginning of the last world cup. I woke up at 4am to watch the France/Senegal game at the bar in the Paris of all places (and the bar was packed to watch the game). And althought I don't remember the instance you are talking about, I am very interested because I am a rabid USA fan (but Italy is a close second due to my heritage /images/graemlins/grin.gif. Forza Italia!)

Joe

[Simon Diamond]

Keeping possession is all well and good, but when you are under the cosh at the end of a game, sometimes the only option is to hoof it clear and try and push out of defence.

A classic example would be a supposedly inferior team holding a 1-0 lead late in the game and clinging on by their fingernails against a better team. Maintaining possession is most likely to have been difficult throughout the game, so why commit potential suicide at the end of the game?

If the ball is in the opponents half, they cannot score.

As far as the offside rule is concerned, isn't the free kick taken from the defensive line, not where the offside player is standing? That would null and void the other guys suggestion.

Simon

[jdl22]

No it's taken where the offending player was. That's exactly why it's the a dumb rule (well the rule isn't dumb of course but the placement of the free kick). As I said I've never seen this actually played out. I could only see it in a match of children because they can't send the ball deep into the opponents end.

In general however I think that placing the free kick where the offending player was punishes the defensive team. The moral of the story is that if you're going to get called for offside then you should be well offside.

[jdl22]

Much like you I watched nearly every world cup match with groggy eyes. I'll see if I can find the match in question and let you know.

[JoeU]

That would be great. I should have some of the 2002 games on tape. I know I have all the US' 1st round games from 98 on tape (not like I'd like to watch that mess again /images/graemlins/smirk.gif).

Joe

[jstnrgrs]

so basicly they play an extra period. If the score is still tied at the end of that period then they play another. Sounds like a good idea to me (assuming that sudden death is unaccatable).
The rule makers also suggested that games ending with a golden goal could create safety problems in the crowd
From what I have heard, just having a soccer match posses a safty problem.

[jdl22]

The problem I have with the silver goal rule is that it is neither here nor there. If you want to stop the match if a goal is scored I don't like it that much but it's fine. The same practice is used in the NFL and NHL (and perhaps a few lesser known sports I don't know). However when you say that maybe the match will end at this time, maybe some other time that strikes me as strange. It seems like being a compromise is the only benefit.

just my $.02

[ComedyLimp]

"1) Keep the official time on the stadium clock"

I dont think its really neccessary as there is 45 mins each half and then any extra time to be played is announced by the fourth official so you pretty much known as a spectator who much time is or isn't left.

There's also a long standing tradition in Football that the game should be essentially the same whether played professionally or in Amateur leagues on a Sunday morning. Hence there is resistance to rule changes that require something other than a pitch, two goals, 22 players and some officials. Also the Ref is considered the highest authority and FIFA are loathe to introduce anything that denudes that in even the slightest manner.

These reasons also mitigate against the use of TV Replay although it seems likely that sooner or later TV will be used for "Did the ball cross the line for a goal" type disputes.

"2) Stop the clock when the ball is not in play (to prevent teams from stalling). (Also the clock time should be reduced to go with this change.)"

It's not really neccessary. Persistent time wasters are punished with a yellow card and the referee will indicate that the time will be added on.

"3) Make substitutions faster"

I agree with this. Substitutions late in the game are often to use up time and are really annoying. I've seen players coming off take a long minute to slowly trudge off from the opposite side of the pitch and I'd force them off at the nearest point on the pitch.

"4) Eliminate diving."

That is already covered in the rules (FIFA calls it "Simulation") and its been a priority for the last few years that they re-emphasise at the start of each season and in the major competitions. Players now get regularly booked for diving. It might seem simple to just clamp down really hard and it will go away, but its actually very difficult to enforce. Blatant dives are relatively rare and often its more a case of a defender making contact with an attacker before the ball and the attacker going down when he could probably have stayed on his feet. Its a very tough call to make so in practice dives are only punished when there is no contact and the attack just flings himself to the ground.

"I sugest that if a player is hurt (or pretending to be hurt), he should be required to leave the field to get medical attention. His team could then either substitute for him, or play short handed while he is checked"

They are. Once the referee has ensured the player is not seriously hurt he will oblige the player and trainer to leave the pitch at the nearest point and the game will contiunue. The player must then re-enter the field of play at the half way line and only on the refs signal. Either way the injury time is added on by the 4th official.

"If a player who acts injured then gets back up and playes, he should be yellow carded"

Simulating injury is punishable by a yellow card.

"Speaking of which, there is no penalty for being yellow carded. I suggest that the player be required to leave the field for ten minutes during which time his team would have to play short handed"

"Sin bins" are an idea I support but I support it becuase the yellow card is too severe a penalty not too lenient. By which I mean that in major tournaments the later stages are often blighted by lots of players getting a second yellow card in the competition and having to miss a match. Hence the biggest games of the show piece tournaments are often deprived of great players and the offending team is too severely punished (losing a key player for a semi-final is a *very* severe punishment) for what often amounts to two badly judged but not malicious tackles. Also the team that was sinned against gets no actual benefit from a yellow card but owuld from a Sin Bin idea.

"Never decied a game with penalty kicks. I think they should just keep playing until someone scores"

I agree. I'd have 30 mins extra time and then 15 mins periods until there is a winner. If Football (NFL) and Baseball can last 4+ hours I'm not sure why we have to pretend to be in such a hurry to get it over with. We are after all only talking about major tournaments held once every other year and the importance and gravity of a World Cup makes deciding the game on penalties offensive. (In domestic Cups you can have replays for drawn games after extra times so the problem is less of an issue).

"At the start of over time, each team would be required to remove one player from the game (so that they are plying ten on ten). Every five minutes there after each team would be required to remove one more player"

This idea usually gets vetoed on the basis that the game quickly becomes something other than football as we know it when played short-handed. You problably couldn't go below 7-a-side on a full sized pitch without it getting a bit farcical and being reduced to hoof it into space and have your fastest striker run after it. It does have its proponents though and other than the play till there is a winner idea I think its the best alternative.

[jstnrgrs]

Thank you for making a thoughtful responce to my suggestions. I do agree with everything you said except for your comments on the clock issues, but as these are the smallest of the problems I mentioned I don't think it is a big deal. Your comments did, however, cause me to think of another major problem with soccer.

I think that no player should ever be suspended because of a call made by a referee in another game. In the middle of a game, the action is to fast, and there is to much chance that an official will get the call wrong. The ref should only be concerned with the game that he is officiating. Let the governing body review the tape and hand out suspensions. This is the way that it is done in most other sports.

[jayadd]

a pitcher is not allowed to wear a differnt color glove under his mitt or have any white from his elbow down. It is considered a distraction to the hitter.
According to MLBPA your peripheral's can not pick up the ball fast enough while camouflage and can be a danger to the hitter in terms of reation time.