# Rule changes I'd like to see **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [October 28, 2010, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670 "2010-10-28T15:53:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/61 "2010-10-29T16:30:33Z")
> [@Captain\_Midnight](#): > > Canadian football: > 1.) 4 downs, not 3. > 2.) 100 yard field, not 120. > 3.) 11 men a side not 12. The field is 110 yards long, not 100. That said, the rules you’re proposing, combined, would, unless you changed all the OTHER rules, make Canadian football almost comically high-scoring. Canadian football has a number of other significant rule differences that give the offense big advantages to make up for the 3 down thing. If you added a down and made the field shorter, but didn’t change all other other rules, every game would have a score like 76-59. It’d be Arena Football. The differences are part of what gives Canadian football its flavour. It also gives the opportunity to make the game more quickly paced, with more changes of possession, though, to be honest, thanks to the incessant commercials, a CFL game is pretty much just as glacial in pace as an NFL or NCAA game. > [@](#): > > If American and Canadian rules in football were standardized, then our Universities can play each other (do they have college football in Canada?). Of course Canada has college football, but Canadian universities don’t award football scholarships, so the only colleges a Canadian university could compete with would be very low division schools or the Ivy League. I don’t really see why there’s much need for cross-border games. After all, Canadian universities also play hockey, soccer and other sports where the rules are precisely the same as their NCAA counterparts, but cross-border games are rare exhibition events. ---
**Author:** ![Randy\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ee7513/32.png) [@Randy\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Randy_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/62 "2010-10-29T20:14:25Z")
I’m not a huge die-hard baseball fan, and I know whole civilizations have risen and fallen over this very issue, but I can’t help but wonder why this isn’t implemented: machine-assisted or computer-assisted strike/ball calling. Whenever I watch a baseball game, I always see at least a couple of pitches that are clearly and obviously called incorrectly. And the graphics they’ve added in the last couple of years that display pitch movement and location just emphasize the problem: umpires are human, and asking them to judge the position of a spheroid moving at 100 mph to an accuracy of quarter-inches is ludicrous. We have the technology. We’ve had it for years. Here’s how I imagine it working: There’s still an umpire behind the plate. And he still gets to define the strike zone. When each batter approaches the plate for the first time in a given game, the plate umpire uses a handheld device to mark the top and bottom of that player’s strike zone – i.e. the line at the midpoint between the batter’s shoulders and the top of his uniform pants, and the line at the hollow below his kneecaps. The batter can even watch the umpire do this if he desires, so he can be sure of what his zone has been adjudged for that game. The stadium’s system stores this information for the rest of the game. The umpire’s mask has some kind of indicator, or maybe even a heads-up display. It could say ball or strike, or it could even display the location of the pitch. Hell, maybe it’s even 3-D and it displays the path of the ball through (or not through) the pentagonal prism of the strike zone. The umpire still announces whether it’s a ball or a strike, and may deviate from the computer. But the computer’s decision is also announced in the stadium. So the umpire is still held accountable for disagreeing with a system that records the position of the ball to within a hundredth of an inch, 1000 times over its trajectory. I know that all MLB stadiums use [pitch-tracking technology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuesTec) for quality control of the umpires, but it makes little sense not to give the umpires access to this information in real time. Yeah yeah, “capricious umpires are a part of the game!!” But they shouldn’t be. The game should be between the two teams. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/63 "2010-10-29T22:32:52Z")
> [@Randy\_Seltzer](#): > > I’m not a huge die-hard baseball fan, and I know whole civilizations have risen and fallen over this very issue, but I can’t help but wonder why this isn’t implemented: machine-assisted or computer-assisted strike/ball calling. I’m a die-hard baseball fan who loves the game’s traditions… and I agree. (I didn’t get into instant replay and computerized officiating, though, because I don’t think of those things as a “rule change,” it’s just a different way of calling the existing rules.) But, really, we’re at the point now that FOX or whatever network can have a display right on the screen that shows, in real time, whether the pitch is a ball or a strike. It appears to be sensationally accurate. Why can’t this be used in some way? Your suggestions for implementation make sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![Bijou\_Drains](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bijou_drains/32/2814_2.png) [@Bijou\_Drains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bijou_Drains)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/64 "2010-10-30T02:06:09Z")
Simon Fraser of BC is moving to NCAA division II sports next year. > **[Simon Fraser University](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Fraser_University)** > > Simon Fraser University (SFU) is a public research university in British Columbia, Canada, with three campuses, all in Greater Vancouver: Burnaby (main campus), Surrey, and Vancouver. The 170-hectare (420-acre) main Burnaby campus on Burnaby Mountain, located 20 kilometres (12 mi) from downtown Vancouver, was established in 1965 and comprises more than 30,000 students and 160,000 alumni. The university was created in an effort to expand higher education across Canada. > SFU is a member of multiple... They are the first non US team in the NCAA ---
**Author:** ![sitchensis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sitchensis/32/4892_2.png) [@sitchensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sitchensis)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/65 "2010-10-30T02:29:48Z")
stupid ---
**Author:** ![sitchensis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sitchensis/32/4892_2.png) [@sitchensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sitchensis)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/66 "2010-10-30T02:53:49Z")
Sorry about the above post:smack: NFL – I would let DB’s keep a hand on the receiver throughout the entire play to make it more attractive to play man-to-man instead of zone. Basketball – I would emphasize foul calls when tiny little guards try and strip the ball from big guys on double teams. I’m sorry just because you’re 5’ 10’’ does not mean you get a free pass to slap the hell out of the 7 footer. Baseball – I would like computer assisted balls and strikes. I hate the idea of any other replay because nobody has come up with a good way of dealing with the base runners. All pro sports – Pay officials lots of money and make it a supremely competitive environment. You should have to work your ass off to make it to the big show as an official, and then you should be rewarded. The moment you have a few bad games you should be worried about being bumped down to college ball. . ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/67 "2010-10-30T15:15:03Z")
NHL Hockey: Get rid of the _Intent to Blow_ rule, the most fucked up rule ever. NCAA (all sports): For recruiting or other NCAA violations, penalties apply to the school _and also_ to the coach and AD if they skip out to another school. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/68 "2010-10-30T16:18:39Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > NHL Hockey: Get rid of the _Intent to Blow_ rule, the most fucked up rule ever. Can’t be done. There are a lot situations where to play needs to be dead before the ref can manage to blow the whistle. For example, suppose there’s a delayed penalty call and the non-offending team pulls their goalie. The non-offending team then gives the puck away to an opposition player, who one-times the puck into the empty net. The goal doesn’t count even if the ref doesn’t manage to blow the whistle before the puck enters the net, because the play was dead from the moment the player gained control of the puck. The problem isn’t the rule. The problem is with egomaniac referees who refuse to admit that they are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/69 "2010-10-30T16:27:16Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > 1. NHL Hockey - Goaltenders are allowed to play the puck in the “forbidden area” while their team is on the power play. The intent of forbidding goaltenders to play the puck in certain areas of the ice is to make dump-and-chase a more viable offensive strategy. When a team is penalty killing they aren’t trying to score at all, so the rule isn’t accomplishing anything except preventing the goaltender from starting a PP rush. It used to be if a goalie left the net he was fair game for a body check. I thought it was better then. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/70 "2010-10-30T16:36:29Z")
The World Cup and other international soccer games need to make use of modern goal-keeping technology. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/71 "2010-10-30T16:46:58Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > Can’t be done. There are a lot situations where to play needs to be dead before the ref can manage to blow the whistle. For example, suppose there’s a delayed penalty call and the non-offending team pulls their goalie. The non-offending team then gives the puck away to an opposition player, who one-times the puck into the empty net. The goal doesn’t count even if the ref doesn’t manage to blow the whistle before the puck enters the net, because the play was dead from the moment the player gained control of the puck. While that’s a good example, it’s not really what anyone is complaining about with “intent to blow.” The problem is usually when refs are obviously claiming to have wanted to blow the whistle after they missed a call. The example you cite could quite easily be written into the rules: “When a delayed penalty has be called, the game shall be considered to have stopped at the moment that the penalized team achieves control of the puck in accordance with the rules of the game, and not when the whistle is blown; any play occurring after the achievment of control by the penalized team shall not count, and the clock shall be reset to the time shown at the moment the penalized team achieves control.” You can do away with “intent to blow” by simply refining specific situations where the sound of the whistle isn’t really what stops the clock. ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/72 "2010-10-30T16:56:23Z")
NFL: _ **ANY** _ play can be challenged, including penalties. The rules as set up now seem to say that there are certain plays that the refs can _never_ get wrong, which is obvious bullshit. By allowing replay at all they’ve already admitted that the refs are fallible, why do they think the refs couldn’t ever possibly blow a holding call or miss a facemask? ---
**Author:** ![Bijou\_Drains](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bijou_drains/32/2814_2.png) [@Bijou\_Drains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bijou_Drains)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/73 "2010-10-30T19:06:01Z")
College FB and NFL refs are not full time , some people say the NFL refs would be much better if they were full time like other pro sports refs/umpires. Most of them have regular jobs during the week. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/74 "2010-10-30T20:02:17Z")
> [@DCnDC](#): > > NFL: _ **ANY** _ play can be challenged, including penalties. The rules as set up now seem to say that there are certain plays that the refs can _never_ get wrong, which is obvious bullshit. By allowing replay at all they’ve already admitted that the refs are fallible, why do they think the refs couldn’t ever possibly blow a holding call or miss a facemask? Not sure what you’re saying here. Are you suggesting a coach should be able to issue a challenge with a claim that a ref missed what should have been a penalty for the other team? ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/75 "2010-10-30T20:13:30Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Not sure what you’re saying here. Are you suggesting a coach should be able to issue a challenge with a claim that a ref missed what should have been a penalty for the other team? Sure. Or challenge to get a flag picked up. Coach should be able to challenge _anything_. There have been plenty of times the refs miss some major thing that could have game-changing implications like blatant pass interference or QB fumbles that are ruled as incomplete passes but by rule must stand because that’s unreviewable. Obviously it would be unwise in most cases to challenge ticky-tacky penalties and showing “indisputable visual evidence” of many such things would be difficult if not possible, but there’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to challenge a holding call if you feel there’s some benefit in doing so. They’d still only get 2 challenges a game, what’s the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Enuma\_Elish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5e9695/32.png) [@Enuma\_Elish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enuma_Elish)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/76 "2010-10-30T20:53:17Z")
In the NFL, penalties shall not be longer than 15 yards. No more throwing it up in the hopes of getting a pass interference call. All football helmets (H.S., college, pro) should be made of foam-rubber to eliminate helmets being used as weapons. They may look silly at first, but we will get used to them. No more celebration penalties. Just start a time clock at the moment a touchdown or FG is scored. The team that scores has a certain amount of time to kick the ball off or they get penalized. Dancing or gyrating after a non-scoring play is a delay of game. ---
**Author:** ![Swords\_to\_Plowshares](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b38774/32.png) [@Swords\_to\_Plowshares](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swords_to_Plowshares)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/77 "2010-10-30T21:23:10Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > FOOTBALL > To score a touchdown, the ball and both feet must be over the goal line. Awful, terrible idea. This would make it far too difficult to run the ball in close to the goal line. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Sensitive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/58956e/32.png) [@Darth\_Sensitive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Sensitive)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/78 "2010-10-30T21:44:02Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > I would guess it’s 90% the latter, though it was likely sold in as the former. It ensures that there’ll be a full 2-minute commercial break near the end of each half. It dates back to when time was kept on the field, so all could know the time left. They kept it because, “Hey! Extra ads!” ---
**Author:** ![Enuma\_Elish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5e9695/32.png) [@Enuma\_Elish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enuma_Elish)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/79 "2010-10-30T21:54:11Z")
Are you saying that the 2-minute warning was instituted as a way to synchronize watches? I never knew that. That is very interesting. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670/80 "2010-10-30T22:09:13Z")
I hate to say it because it’s always cliche, but an improvement to U.S. football would be to adopt Canadian field dimensions. While the Canadian field is famously 110 yards long, it’s also MUCH wider, and had 20-yard-deep end zones. The wider field and deeper end zones increase scoring, emphasize the importance of speed and mobility, and lead to longer and more fascinating plays from scrimmage. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rule-changes-id-like-to-see/558670.md?page=5)