[QUOTE=zamboniracer]
I respect your opinion certainly, but the reason for the towel/improved lie rule escapes me. A rule without a justifiable reason for existence is just a trap for the unwary. Golf is hard enough (ie striking a ball with sticks designed for another purpose) without pitfalls like making it illegal to get your trousers dirty.
[/QUOTE]
It’s more the result of a “zero-tolerance” policy. You are not allowed to improve the lie of the ball or your stance using artificial means. In the case of the towel, the player can fairly be said to be “eliminating irregularities of surface”, which is a no-no. If you have to take your shot from your knees, then slipping on the grass is a risk you take and you can’t use your towel to help prevent it.
[QUOTE=Operation Ripper]
Traveling in pro basketball, those guys walk all game long, christ.
[/QUOTE]
Is the rule still 1 1/2 steps?
[QUOTE=Malacandra]
Ah! Another good one from cricket: the Lost Ball rule. It’s still on the books that if the ball becomes lost or inaccessible while still on the field of play, the fielding side can call “Lost Ball” to restrict the number of runs scored from that delivery to six (otherwise the batsmen could carry on running until the cows come home). … Theory or not, I know of no instance of the Law being applied since the 19th century.
[/QUOTE]
As with lost balls in golf, a bit element of this is keeping the rules consistent from the highest level of the sport down to the most basic. There’s plenty of golf courses, and probably cricket pitches, with rabbit holes capable of swallowing a ball beyond recovery.
OK, for football, how about the ridiculous goalnet-inspecting and stud-checking seen by linesmen? When did a sub get stopped from taking to the pitch because his studs weren’t good enough?
[QUOTE=NoClueBoy]
On the other hand, rules like double dribble and travelling are being made obsolete as we watch because of the way the calls are being made (or not made).
No need to lecture us on the “intent” of the thread.
[/QUOTE]
I just happen to think the distinction results in a more interesting question than the obvious answers of what never gets called. Sorry if it came off as a lecture.
If there was a rule in basketball that the ball must not touch the floor and then directly enter the basket before being counted as a basket, that would be an example of a rule that is effectively irrelevant. It could have that been back when the game was invented that was the best way to score. Obviously with the way the game is played today, that isn’t going to happen.
There are dozens and dozens of calls in sports that never get called: holding in football and interference in hockey (at least up until this past season) along with the others already mentioned.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
Logically, you would have to agree, then, that the rule was abandoned in roughly 1845, since teams have always had more than nine players pretty much since the sport was invented in its modern form. Major league teams have had 25-man teams since before you were born.
However, at any time, the offensive and defensive teams in play always have exactly nine men.
In baseball, obviously outdated rules include:
-
Strikeouts not counting on dropped third strikes, an artifact of baseball’s precursor sports.
-
The appeal rule, or parts thereof, anyway.
-
A number of scoring conventions, most notably the manner in which wins and losses are assigned.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t forget the rule outlawing players from opposing teams talking to each other as “fraterization”.
[QUOTE=Capa84]
Similar to the “drop kick” rule, there is an NFL rule that says on the last play of a half, you can fair catch a kick, and then you get a free kick to your goalpost for 3 pts.
[/QUOTE]
I think this is a legitimate winner. I thought it was an option any time after a fair catch, not just at the end of a half, though (but of course, now it’s obsolete for any other time of the game).
[QUOTE=GorillaMan]
OK, for [association] football, how about the ridiculous goalnet-inspecting and stud-checking seen by linesmen? When did a sub get stopped from taking to the pitch because his studs weren’t good enough?
[/QUOTE]
This is perhaps also about consistency with lower levels. At youth leagues and up perhaps to high school, it’s not unheard of (at least it wasn’t back in my day) for a referee to forbid a particular pair of cleats with exposed metal (or otherwise dangerous equipment). Or are you saying that nobody makes shoes with metal in the studs any more?
[QUOTE=ftg]
In basketball, in addition to travelling, palming the ball and double dribbling are now allowed.
[/QUOTE]
And don’t forget, in the NBA this year, moving picks are also allowed! *
- subject to be overidden by the standard NBA “pushing or even touching lightly anyone with a larger endorsement contract than you is a foul” clause, of course.
They still call the last day of practice at the Indy 500 “carburation day” even though there hasn’t been a carb there in years.
[QUOTE=mike1dog]
They still call the last day of practice at the Indy 500 “carburation day” even though there hasn’t been a carb there in years.
[/QUOTE]
“Fuel Injector Reprogramming Day” doesn’t sound the same.
[QUOTE=Capa84]
Similar to the “drop kick” rule, there is an NFL rule that says on the last play of a half, you can fair catch a kick, and then you get a free kick to your goalpost for 3 pts.
[/QUOTE]
The fair catch kick can be used after any fair catch, not just the last play in a half. It’s a regular FG attempt, but the opposing team must line up 10 yards away, like on a kickoff. So it’s free in the sense that no rush is physically possible, but there are still 22 guys on the field. Also, if you shkoon (sp?) the kick, the defense can still catch it and take off with it, as it’s basically a regular FG try. IMO, it was obsolete the day it was instituted, not because of advances in the game. (This is just my understanding; the actual rules aren’t available to the public, and I’m a little hazy.)
Regarding the fumble touchback, that is far from obsolete, having been a factor just last year in the playoffs. (Was it in the Superbowl that it happened? I think it was the Seahawks who did it.) It also happened in the Giants @ Saints @ East Rutherford game, when Joe Horn dove for the endzone but dropped the ball into the pylon. hehheh.
You might note that there is consistency in the rule. No matter what, if you fumble the ball into an endzone and it rolls out of bounds, you lose possession. Either it’s a safety and you free kick, or it’s a touchback.
The inconsistency is on fourth down or inside a two minute warning, when the ball is returned to the spot of the fumble unless the guy who actually fumbled recovers it. (Or it was fumbled backwards.) In that situation, the rule does seem a bit punitive.
Incidentally, an unoffical rule summary for the NFL can be found here, and while most seem relevant, this section jumped out at me:
While I’ve no doubt that this might have come up once or twice in the rough-and-tumble days before television, it really does seem obsolete in this day and age.
Another section that seems to have been rendered mostly moot, though not as completely as the above:
No videogame developers ever seem to grasp this rule. (Dynamix Football was the only series to get it right.)
Teams almost never choose to kick, because at halftime the opponent will simply chose to receive…again. Herm Edwards actually chose to kick in a game with the Jets, and so Gang Green had to kickoff to begin both halves. Not the smartest call ever by Herm.
This rule isn’t so much obsolete as it is forcing the issue. If you could choose to kickoff in the first half and then receive in the second, the coin flip would be much more meaningful. As it stands, the “decision” is reduced to a mere formality, with all coaches (except Edwards) chooing to receive without fail.
[QUOTE=seosamh]
In cricket, there’s a law (they are not “rules” for some reason) that requires the next batsman to be at the crease, ready to receive, within 3 minutes of the fall of the previous wicket (see the MCC’s website).
I cannot find any instance of a batsman every having been given out in that way in any First Class game, although there are all sorts of stories about people being in the bog when required to go in and, famously, there is the one about David Steele getting hopelessly lost at Lord’s against Australia in 1975 when trying to find his way from the dressing room onto the pitch.
[/QUOTE]
H Yadav was timed out playing for Tripura v Oriaasa at Cuttack in 1998. That’s the one and only incident of it in first class cricket.
The wonderful bookend to the David Steele Story is the time Bob Willis arrived at the crease, only to have to trot back to the pavillion because he forgot his bat!
mm
[QUOTE=mamboman]
The wonderful bookend to the David Steele Story is the time Bob Willis arrived at the crease, only to have to trot back to the pavillion because he forgot his bat!
mm
[/QUOTE]
IIRC someone (it could have been Jack Hobbs, Patsy Hendren or George Gunn) once met the incoming batsman at the edge of the field, and while chattily escorting him to the wicket relieved him of his bat, and it was only when the batsmen was preparing to take strike that he noticed the absence, to general hilarity.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Teams almost never choose to kick, because at halftime the opponent will simply chose to receive…again. Herm Edwards actually chose to kick in a game with the Jets, and so Gang Green had to kickoff to begin both halves. Not the smartest call ever by Herm.
[/QUOTE]
IIRC, The University of California Golden Bears, during the dark years of the Tom Holmoe regime, wound up kicking to open both halves of a game once.
And Herm Edwards went to Cal. Coincidence? You’d think people associated with Berkeley would be smart…
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Teams almost never choose to kick, because at halftime the opponent will simply chose to receive…again. Herm Edwards actually chose to kick in a game with the Jets, and so Gang Green had to kickoff to begin both halves. Not the smartest call ever by Herm.
This rule isn’t so much obsolete as it is forcing the issue. If you could choose to kickoff in the first half and then receive in the second, the coin flip would be much more meaningful. As it stands, the “decision” is reduced to a mere formality, with all coaches (except Edwards) chooing to receive without fail.
[/QUOTE]
Holy hell, how did I never know about this? :eek: Great post.
[QUOTE=jsc1953]
IIRC, The University of California Golden Bears, during the dark years of the Tom Holmoe regime, wound up kicking to open both halves of a game once.
And Herm Edwards went to Cal. Coincidence? You’d think people associated with Berkeley would be smart…
[/QUOTE]
It’s still not as dumb as taking the wind instead of the ball in OT.
When (American) football was a much lower scoring game, kicking off to start the game was quite common as it was used as an attempt to get good field position, which was critical when there might only be one or two scores in a game.
Football still has rules which are left over from the late 1890s, early 1900s when the game was reformed to make it less brutal (if you can believe that). There are penalties for “interlocking interference”, which makes plays like the “flying wedge” illegal. “Helping the runner” is rarely called now (Sorry, Notre Dame fans). But it used to be fairly common for big lineman to take little backs and just toss them over the pile. The rule was not designed to prevent Reggie Bush from pushing Matt Leinart.
It is still illegal to hurdle a tackler, but the way it is written it is hard to get called for it. I think you would have to actually step on the guy as you went over now instead of jumping completely over him as a lot of athletic ballcarriers do.
Baseball still has very specific definitions of illegal pitches such as the “emery ball” or “shine ball”. These were created because pitchers would come up with some sort of illegal pitch and try to get away with it because it wasn’t explicitly defined as such.
[QUOTE=BobT]
It is still illegal to hurdle a tackler, but the way it is written it is hard to get called for it. I think you would have to actually step on the guy as you went over now instead of jumping completely over him as a lot of athletic ballcarriers do.
[/QUOTE]
(NCAA) It’s legal to hurdle a tackler if you have the ball, but not if you don’t. The problem is that it takes quite the set of circumstances and superior athletic ability to hurdle:
SECTION 14. Hurdling
ARTICLE 1. a. Hurdling is an attempt by a player to jump with one or both feet or knees foremost over an opponent who is still on his feet (Exception: The runner) (Rule 9-1-2-i).
b. “On his feet’’ means that no part of the opponent’s body other than one or both feet is in contact with the ground.
c. Hurdling an offensive player before the snap is a dead-ball foul. This includes offensive players in a three- or four-point stance.
Free kick after fair catch has been in the football rules since the beginning (it’s a carryover from the “mark” in Rugby). NCAA dropped the rule in the 1940s, and High Schools dropped the rule just a few years ago. The game has changed so much that the concept seems silly now.
Last time I saw a RL game on TV, the scrum was merely a formality. I don’t think anyone in the scrum even moved, and I’m pretty sure the Half just rolled the ball straight to his side.
[QUOTE=aktep]
(Last time I saw a RL game on TV, the scrum was merely a formality. I don’t think anyone in the scrum even moved, and I’m pretty sure the Half just rolled the ball straight to his side.
[/QUOTE]
Right!! Now, back in the day when Rugby League was a game of skills (and by that I mean a wide range of skills not a narrow but intense range) you were not allowed to put your head in the scrum unless you knew exactly what you were doing. Hookers, halves and Tight Head props would regularly get sent off for cheating/incomptence. Plus, the other great function of scrums - i.e. a place to start a fight, has been taken away in the general pussification of the game.
mm
[QUOTE=aktep]
(NCAA) It’s legal to hurdle a tackler if you have the ball, but not if you don’t.
[/QUOTE]
Is this a typo, or was there a recent rule change? Because I know I’ve seen a flag thrown for hurdling in NCAA football. Spectacular play…but called back.
[QUOTE=jsc1953]
Is this a typo, or was there a recent rule change? Because I know I’ve seen a flag thrown for hurdling in NCAA football. Spectacular play…but called back.
[/QUOTE]
That “(Exception: The runner)” has been in the rule for quite some time, but I do know that there was a period where the runner could not hurdle. There was also (IIRC) a period when hurdling downed players was illegal. I’ll try to look it up this evening and see if I can find years.
[QUOTE=Don Logan]
I once read that there was a rule in baseball stating players on opposing teams aren’t supposed to fraternize with each other during the game, don’t know if it still on the books but it is surely not enforced.
[/QUOTE]
Reggie Jackson pretty much killed that one by himself.