Sports rules changes you would like to see changed

[HDPM]

DH as mentioned above of course.

But I would like to see the rule about hitting a defenseless receiver helmet to helmet changed. I figure if you go over the middle and lay out you should get whatever you get. I hate receivers. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[IndieMatty]

Balks are stupid. The runner is trying to "STEAL A BASE". The pitcher should be able to do anything he wants to prevent that.


If a NFL Coach win's a challenge, he should not lose it. That's stupid.

[Usul]

In the CFL and all other Canadian football, PI is a 15 yard penatly. I think its one of the few rules in Canadian football that's better.

Also, I agree that replay should be abolished. First of all it kills the momentum of the game that already has WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY to many comercial breaks (Comercial, kickoff, comercial? Give me a ****ing break). Secondly it overturns awesome, amazingly athletic plays because of a slight technicality, or a matter of an inch or two. I think the NFL should air on the side of letting amazingly athletic plays stand. Thirdly, I've seen several instances, not just one or two, where the official looks at the replay for several minutes, trots out onto the field and makes a blatently wrong call.

While I'm ranting, the NFL should change the rule from two feet in bounds to only one foot in bounds for a catch, like in college. Also make it so there is no "force out rule" (where the reciever would have landed in bounds but was forced out by a defender, so its called a catch), like in college. That would make for more spectacular catches and more huge hits by DBs on the sidelines.

Also, the "helmet to helmet" rule is hypocritical bullcrap, but that's the subject of another rant entirely.

[Richard Tanner]

A lineman can "flench" all he wants and there's no penelty, it's when he enters the neutral zone that it is illegal. Hince the explaination by referees, "Defensive player entered the neutral zone causing the offensive player to rise up."
Second, please tell me you're kidding with the replay, that's rapidly becoming a nessecary evil. Although I will grant you that with officals already in the booth, why not just have them do it instead of the middle man on the field.
My guess, tradition.

Cody

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Two words:
Designated Hitter
End of discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
with your permission, I would like to re-start the discussion. Why should the DH be dissolved?

BTW, me supporting it has 0 to do with Edgar Martinez.

[Richard Tanner]

Again, with PI penelties, okay I'm a defensive player defending a long pass, guess I'll just hit the guy if I'm beat, why not, he only get's 15 yrds. The penelty is there for a reason, and it's a good one.
As for the one foot thing (and the others you mentioned), the goal of the game is not to be customized to be super-sensational. The goal of the game is to be a fair contest with set rules. While we're removing the force out rule, why not just make the sidelines go from white to grey to black so that black is clearly out of bounds but we can judge the "sensation-o-meter" on a play to determine how far into the grey the receiver may go.

Cody

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Balks are stupid. The runner is trying to "STEAL A BASE". The pitcher should be able to do anything he wants to prevent that.

[/ QUOTE ] By intentionally misleading the baserunner and the batter? Balks are banned for various reasons. 1. It is basically cheating(how can you motion torwards home then decided to throw to first?) come'on
2. Its total bush league clown [censored]. It might as well be a clown show out there, with elephants and trapeze artists.

If you let the pitcher balk, then runners should be able to deflect hit or thrown balls, right?

[Richard Tanner]

"If a NFL Coach win's a challenge, he should not lose it. That's stupid."

I agree in principle, however there has to be a balance between a challenge every play and none at all (or three, max, a game as it is now),

Cody

[razor]

[ QUOTE ]
Widening the goals would be better as well. The goals are ok, but with the increased size in goalie equipment the amount of open space has collectively shrunk. Now I understand players shoot harder, and I dont have a problem with the safety of goalies in mind. You do have to increase the size of the goals to make the same amount of empty space as their used to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

But would 10" goalie pads really impact goalies safety... I hear some tv bobbleheads talk like this is so, but I don't get how. The goalie catching glove is also ridiculously big.

I really don't see how cutting back on the size of goalies equipment will impact their safety.

Also, if the goalie goes out of his crease to play the puck he should be fair game (now that will impact their safety)... but I simply don't understand how a goalie should be allowed to go into the corner to play the puck and be immune from getting hit. If you don't wanna get hit, stay in the crease.

Reduce goalie equipment size, make goalies fair game if they leave the net to play the puck, tag up offside and no red line. That just might open things up enough to eliminate the effectiveness of clutching and grabbing.

[Usul]

The PI thing works both ways. How many times have you seen a WR take a dive instead of trying to catch the ball so he can get his 50 yard penalty.

I'm not advocating bending the rules for more sensational plays. The fact is that every league wants rules that make the game sensational and more interesting. That is the main criteria. The thing about rules is that they are assesed equally to all teams (in theory) and therefore they constitute a "fair contest with set rules" whether they are sensational or not.