Sports rules that are so systematically ignored by the officials they should be removed

[Mr_Shine]

@Busy_Scissors

Foul throws in football are rarely called in football at the top level, although you’ll see players doing them every weekend in the prem. There’s no real advantage, though, in making a foul throw over a correct throw - it’s not like it goes further, or you can do it quicker.
But you will see foul throws penalised all the time in amateur football, or kid’s football. Guarantee I will see 1 or 2 called in my lad’s game tomorrow, for example. This seems right, as kids should be taught the correct rules of the game, but it’s sort of undermined by the most influential and visible pro football matches ignoring it.

Clearly when the rules of the game were laid down, a formulation for the return of the ball to play was required. ie you can’t just pick it up and hurl it in one handed like a discus. So it’d not like some sillly extraneous rule like the ‘no fraternising in baseball’ example above, that you could legit just forget about - it’s fundamental. But it is systematically ignored by the officials.

Why would you need a rule about how to throw it beyond “stand outside the touchline, arm power only”? Not arguing, just curious.

[That_Don_Guy]

@RickJay

Surely you are not suggesting the strike zone be removed from the rulebook?

I think the request is for the opposite - for the strike zone to be called as specified in the rules, as opposed to different umpires having their own interpretations (hence “my strike zone”).

[Atamasama]

@Busy_Scissors

Foul throws in football are rarely called in football at the top level, although you’ll see players doing them every weekend in the prem. There’s no real advantage, though, in making a foul throw over a correct throw - it’s not like it goes further, or you can do it quicker.
But you will see foul throws penalised all the time in amateur football, or kid’s football. Guarantee I will see 1 or 2 called in my lad’s game tomorrow, for example. This seems right, as kids should be taught the correct rules of the game, but it’s sort of undermined by the most influential and visible pro football matches ignoring it.

In high school they certainly got on our case if we threw it in incorrectly. Two hands, over the head, etc. Honestly the correct throw seems like the most controlled way to throw anyway so I don’t think it ever occurred to me to throw it any other way.

[Mahaloth]

@K364

Not sure what you mean. The video showed her stepping on the line before hitting the ball and that’s a foot fault.

I can’t find the right video, then. I’ve seen an odd foot fault that is really different and it is almost never called. I remember John McEnroe saying he was not aware of the rule.

[DSYoungEsq]

@Busy_Scissors

Foul throws in football are rarely called in football at the top level, although you’ll see players doing them every weekend in the prem. There’s no real advantage, though, in making a foul throw over a correct throw - it’s not like it goes further, or you can do it quicker.
But you will see foul throws penalised all the time in amateur football, or kid’s football. Guarantee I will see 1 or 2 called in my lad’s game tomorrow, for example. This seems right, as kids should be taught the correct rules of the game, but it’s sort of undermined by the most influential and visible pro football matches ignoring it.

Clearly when the rules of the game were laid down, a formulation for the return of the ball to play was required. ie you can’t just pick it up and hurl it in one handed like a discus. So it’d not like some sillly extraneous rule like the ‘no fraternising in baseball’ example above, that you could legit just forget about - it’s fundamental. But it is systematically ignored by the officials.

Well, keep in mind that the 2016-17 Laws changed what is considered a foul throw. So you probably aren’t seeing foul throws as often as you think in the Premier League. The new wording limits the consideration of when both feet must be in contact with the ground to the moment the ball is delivered. So the old interpretation, that you had to keep both feet down all the way through the throwing motion, is no longer applicable. For this reason, you don’t see much toe-dragging in the Premier League any more. You can lift the back foot once you’ve released the ball.

@Mr_Shine

Why would you need a rule about how to throw it beyond “stand outside the touchline, arm power only”? Not arguing, just curious.

Law 15 requires that, at the moment the ball is delivered, you be standing facing the field, with both feet in contact with the ground. The throw must be done with both hands, and must start from behind the head and go over the head. This precludes the following things from being done:

1. Throwing the ball one-handed, which could propel the ball a goodly distance down or across the field;

2. Throwing the ball in a way which can easily be confused with simply tossing the ball to another player arriving to make the throw;

3. Throwing the ball onto the pitch in a way that confuses the players as to whether or not you’ve actually intended to re-start the play.

As a result, the area of play for the throw in is usually limited to ten or twenty yards from where the ball went out of play, and all players will recognize when the ball has been returned to play because of the unique motion used. Some players specialize in launching a throw in a goodly distance, which can result in the ball being delivered to the area in front of the goal, but that’s not the norm.

@Atamasama

In high school they certainly got on our case if we threw it in incorrectly. Two hands, over the head, etc. Honestly the correct throw seems like the most controlled way to throw anyway so I don’t think it ever occurred to me to throw it any other way.

As a referee for youth play, even at the U-19 level, I would often see players forget what they were doing and simply chuck the ball into play in much the way a basketball player passes the ball. You blow the whistle, stopping play, and just look at them like, “really?” :smack:

[AK84]

Law 42.8 in Cricket, Intimidatory Bowling at the highest level is never called, even if the bowler is trying to hurt the batter.
The general consensus is that a batsman should deal with it.
Unless they are English of course.

[Procrustus]

Does soccer have a rule against faking being hurt?

[AK84]

@Procrustus

Does soccer have a rule against faking being hurt?

Simulation. It’s a yellow card offence.
The recent introduction of VAR has shown lots of the dives were… not dives.

[AK84]

@Procrustus

Does soccer have a rule against faking being hurt?

Simulation. It’s a yellow card offence.
The recent introduction of VAR has shown lots of the dives were… not dives.

[Loach]

@Grrr

I’m not a sports guy. But it seems to me NFL refs don’t call intentional grounding anymore.

Is that still a thing?

@Velocity

They still do, but generally only when it’s really blatant.

They are very quick to call it. I see it called all the time. It’s just that by the rule it is allowed at times.

[D_Odds]

@Loach

They are very quick to call it. I see it called all the time. It’s just that by the rule it is allowed at times.

Agreed. I’ve watched my home-team QB get called on it far far too often. A few things (but not all-inclusive) that make a purposely bad pass not intentional grounding:

1. Pass is near a receiver: A QB can throw at a receiver’s feet, or out of his reach and out of bounds, as long as it is near a qualified receiver. So a QB can throw at a blocking RB’s or TE’s feet.

2. QB is outside of the offensive line tackles (an imaginary line based on where they lined up) and the pass crosses the line of scrimmage. This pass doesn’t need to be near anyone or anything.

I’m sure I’m missing something else and others who follow much more closely will point out my omissions and mistakes.

[Loach]

@D_Odds

Agreed. I’ve watched my home-team QB get called on it far far too often. A few things (but not all-inclusive) that make a purposely bad pass not intentional grounding:

1. Pass is near a receiver: A QB can throw at a receiver’s feet, or out of his reach and out of bounds, as long as it is near a qualified receiver. So a QB can throw at a blocking RB’s or TE’s feet.

2. QB is outside of the offensive line tackles (an imaginary line based on where they lined up) and the pass crosses the line of scrimmage. This pass doesn’t need to be near anyone or anything.

I’m sure I’m missing something else and others who follow much more closely will point out my omissions and mistakes.

It’s also ok if there is no imminent pressure. That covers the spike to stop the clock. The QB can also step back, see no one is open, and throw it out of bounds. That most often happens when there are a few seconds left and they are trying to squeeze in another play. The QB can throw away a pass without penalty as long as it’s not to get away from a sack.

[D_Odds]

@Loach

It’s also ok if there is no imminent pressure. That covers the spike to stop the clock. The QB can also step back, see no one is open, and throw it out of bounds. That most often happens when there are a few seconds left and they are trying to squeeze in another play. The QB can throw away a pass without penalty as long as it’s not to get away from a sack.

I looked it up because I was unsure about the second. You’re right; it’s when a QB is facing an imminent loss of yardage. As for the spike Rule 8 Section 2 Item 3:

Stopping Clock. A player under center is permitted to stop the game clock legally to save time if, immediately upon receiving the snap, he begins a continuous throwing motion and throws the ball directly into the ground.

The spike is specifically covered, probably because the proximity of defensive players could be considered imminent danger of loss of yardage.

[Bijou_Drains]

did baseball clean up the “area play” on double plays? for those that don’t know they would let the out at 2nd base count as an out even if the infielder never stepped on the base.

[jaycat]

@Bijou_Drains

did baseball clean up the “area play” on double plays? for those that don’t know they would let the out at 2nd base count as an out even if the infielder never stepped on the base.

Replay challenges have relegated the “area play” to the dustbin of history.

[Loach]

@D_Odds

I looked it up because I was unsure about the second. You’re right; it’s when a QB is facing an imminent loss of yardage. As for the spike Rule 8 Section 2 Item 3: The spike is specifically covered, probably because the proximity of defensive players could be considered imminent danger of loss of yardage.

Fair enough. I didn’t look it up tried to do it from memory.

[BrotherCadfael]

@RickJay

Surely you are not suggesting the strike zone be removed from the rulebook?

Either all umpires should enforce the zone as written in the book, or, if the zone in the book is not practical, the book should be modified to something all umpires can agree on and consistently enforce.

[Atamasama]

@BrotherCadfael

Either all umpires should enforce the zone as written in the book, or, if the zone in the book is not practical, the book should be modified to something all umpires can agree on and consistently enforce.

Or remove the umpire from the equation now that technology is better at calling strikes and balls anyway. Let them make the other judgements at the plate.

[RickJay]

@BrotherCadfael

Either all umpires should enforce the zone as written in the book, or, if the zone in the book is not practical, the book should be modified to something all umpires can agree on and consistently enforce.

The difference between umpires isn’t a matter of differing opinion on what the strike zone should be, it’s just that humans cannot consistently do what umps are being asked to do. It doesn’t matter how you define it, you’ll always have problems with umps in this regard. The only real solution is to use technology to call balls and strikes.

[Uncle_Jocko]

@RickJay

The difference between umpires isn’t a matter of differing opinion on what the strike zone should be, it’s just that humans cannot consistently do what umps are being asked to do. It doesn’t matter how you define it, you’ll always have problems with umps in this regard. The only real solution is to use technology to call balls and strikes.

I’ve been umpiring youth baseball for about 10 years. People who complain about differing strike zones from different umpires should give it a try themselves before they whine about the umps too much.

People aren’t robots, and even with the most highly trained professional umpires in the world, they’re going to develop their own “strike zone” over years of working that may not technically exactly match the rule book. Or, if you’re Eric Gregg, you call pitches two feet outside strikes, that can happen, too.

Umpires are ridiculously good at what they do, considering the challenges of deciding whether a ball traveling at 97 miles an hour darting left-to-right and breaking sharply downward clipped the black of the plate or not. If you want to use technology to get balls and strikes exactly right in the majors, I can see that, but umpires are always going to be around in lower professional levels and in amateur baseball. Personally, I’m okay with a bit of “human factor” variation in sports officiating … players and coaches have the freedom to screw up and misexecute here and there, I’m not sure why we hold officials to a higher level of perfection. As long as it’s not egregiously Gregg-level bad, I mean.