Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Too many doltish rules ruining NFL

Game would be great if half the rule book was ditched

  • Print

The NFL is America's pastime, hands down.

Imagine how much fun it would be if they got rid of about half the rule book.

Related Items

The replay challenge penalty? The tuck rule? Muffed punts can't be advanced?

Ridiculously harsh. Completely unnecessary. No idea why it's like that.

The league clearly has too many folks on the payroll who have too little to do, so they get together from time to time in fancy hotels to come up with ways to justify their existence.

The result is a set of rules that have grown into a convoluted mess, with no sense of what is reasonable or even needed. It's as though the NFL is trying to keep everyone -- the players, the fans, the coaches, even the officials -- in a constant state of guesswork.

We can imagine a day when we'll hear the referee explain a call thusly:

"Due to the coach challenging a play that was already subject to an automatic review, but because he was able to tuck his red flag back into his pocket before he muffed it, we will assess a 15-yard penalty, run 20 seconds off the clock, and order his team to switch conferences."

A bit over the top, but not by much.

The league needs to get busy, expunging the rules that aren't needed and bringing some common sense to the rest. Start with the head-shaking replay rule that may have cost the Detroit Lions a much-needed win on Thanksgiving Day.

That one should be erased from the books immediately.

"This comes up every year," said Ray Anderson, the NFL's director of football operations. "Can we simplify and be more cohesive and get rid of some rules that may be offshoots? We will go through that exercise again. We have rewritten some of the rule book over the course of the last few years, to try to simplify it and get it to be more coherent."

Clearly, there's still a lot of work to do, thanks to a "we must have a rule for everything that can possibly happen on a football field at any given time in the course of human history" mindset.

The replay challenge penalty has already been called several times, including the previous week in Atlanta, but no team was impacted more than the Lions' in their overtime loss to the Texans. For those eating turkey at the time, the officials clearly blew a call on a long touchdown run by Houston. Detroit coach Jim Schwartz, justifiably outraged, threw his red challenge flag to make sure the play was reviewed. That wasn't necessary, since scoring plays are subject to an automatic check from the replay official.

So, a sensible person might say, what's the problem? The officials pick up their yellow flags all the time. They could just tell the coach to take a chill pill.

But the NFL decided that coaches wanting to challenge a call that was already going to be reviewed anyway was a potential menace that could ruin the very fabric of the game. That without some of rule to prevent unnecessary dissent and embarrassment of officials, the field could run red with challenge flags.

So, when a coach commits such a grievous act, he is assessed a 15-yard penalty (the same sanction that's handed out to a player who tries to rip off an opponent's head). And not only does his team lose the yardage, the officials are no longer allowed to review a play they were going to look at in the first place.

Huh?

Anderson, in perhaps the most obvious statement that will ever come from his lips, acknowledged the penalty "may be too harsh" and will be reviewed immediately.

Hallelujah!

Hey, while they're at it, here's a few more things the NFL needs to change or eliminate:

-- The tuck rule. Why this one is still around -- more than a decade after it reared its ugly head in a New England-Oakland playoff game -- remains one of life's great mysteries. If a quarterback's arm is going forward when he loses the ball, it's an incomplete pass. If not, it's a fumble. Simple as that. Allowing a team to keep the ball because the QB lost control while trying to tuck it away is utter nonsense.

-- A muffed ball can be recovered by the punting team, but not advanced. Apparently, this one stems from the theory that a returner who touches the ball but never has control of it didn't actually fumble. Hogwash. If the coverage team can recover the loose ball, they should be able to run with it. Period.

-- Interference penalties. The NFL is always reluctant to copy the college game, but this is one case where it clearly should. When a defensive back interferes with a receiver, it should be a 15-yard penalty (as it is in college), not marked at the spot of the foul (the pro rule). Maybe if the defender flagrantly drags down a receiver, the current penalty could still be applied. Otherwise, there's no reason for interference -- a debatable call in so many cases -- to potentially result in a much worse penalty than a horrific personal foul (which is 15 yards).

-- Overtime. The NFL rightly decided a few years ago that it wasn't fair for a game to potentially be decided by a coin flip. Of course, they didn't just go with the obvious solution (allowing each team to have at least one offensive possession in overtime), coming up with a "modified sudden death" rule. If the receiving team scores a TD on its first possession, it wins the game. But if the team getting the ball first kicks a go-ahead field goal, the other team gets a possession. Another example of the NFL over-thinking a problem.

-- The Associated Press

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition November 26, 2012 C5

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

LATEST VIDEO

On the job with sea lion researchers

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • The sun peers through the fog to illuminate a tree covered in hoar frost near Headingley, Manitoba Thursday- Standup photo- February 02, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • Jia Ping Lu practices tai chi in Assiniboine Park at the duck pond Thursday morning under the eye of a Canada goose  - See Bryksa 30 Day goose challenge Day 13- May 17, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)

View More Gallery Photos

Poll

Who has been the Jets best defenceman so far this season?

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google