re: Sports rules you would like to see changed

end the universal DH and make pitchers hit

The ground CAN cause a fumble, hold on to the ball, pussy.

quote:

---

- if the offense commits a penalty in their own end zone it’s a safety
- if the defense commits a penalty in their end zone the offense gets the ball on the 2 yard line (how’s that for arbitrary?)
- the rule you mentioned is in fact special
- there is no where else on the field where play would stop just because the ball crossed the plane regardless of whether the ball carrier is out of bounds or down.
- the offense can score points by kicking the ball through the goal posts at the back of the end zone (I think you’d agree this can’t happen anywhere else on the field)
- a ball can be downed by a defending team in the end zone and awarded a touchback (nowhere else on the field do you get a 20-25 yard “reward” for taking over possession of the ball)

---

I mean, at this point, we’re in full opinion mode, but I think all of those fit within the normal context of football. Defense being penalized for a penalty in the endzone gets them super close but doesn’t give them a penalty TD like you see in rugby. Offense committing a penalty in the endzone, ya can’t go backwards so gotta give the other team some points.

At the end of the day, because it is a special or nuanced rule, by definition that means it’s almost an opinion for whether we have it or not. There’s nothing structurally requiring it. I’m not denying that there can be nuanced or unique rules. I’m just saying I don’t like it.

quote:

---

Every argument I’ve seen about this seem to be based on one of the below:
- denying that the end zone has or should have unique rules, which feels like a lazy argument
- suggesting that it’s somehow unfair to the offense and that they should arbitrarily be given an additional chance after making a mistake
- that this rule is antiquated and no longer should apply, all the while ignoring the reasons for the rule itself, as well as seemingly being okay with all of the other rules that are based in the same antiquated concepts that the rest of the game is governed by (why 4 downs? What’s special about 10 yards? Why 6 points for a touchdown?)

---

My issue or argument is that it just doesn’t make sense. Did the offense make a “mistake”? Sure, but both teams make tons of mistakes on every play, but they only matter if the other team capitalized on them. Recovering the football is how the defense gets a turnover, not by forcing a fumble. You have to have both. I think fumble recovery rates are typically slightly skewed to offense, but they’re probably close to 50/50 and any time it goes out of bounds it goes back to the offense. I don’t get why in this situation the defense gets the ball even though they didn’t complete the play (aka recover the ball).

quote:

---

But I’ll humor you and others:

What do you think should happen on this play, and why?

---

Idk, loss of downs, offense gets the ball at whichever is farthest back: 5 yard line or wherever previous snap started from.

I'd also like to see the onside kick rules change to give kicking teams a more realistic chance at being successful late in games. Maybe a safety issue would prevent it, but I think it would add an interesting new dynamic. Idk the stats of successful onside kicks but it has to be less than 10%.

quote:

---

My issue or argument is that it just doesn’t make sense. Did the offense make a “mistake”? Sure, but both teams make tons of mistakes on every play, but they only matter if the other team capitalized on them. Recovering the football is how the defense gets a turnover, not by forcing a fumble. You have to have both. I think fumble recovery rates are typically slightly skewed to offense, but they’re probably close to 50/50 and any time it goes out of bounds it goes back to the offense. I don’t get why in this situation the defense gets the ball even though they didn’t complete the play (aka recover the ball).

---

It's not that the offense made a mistake; it's where they made the mistake or were forced into it. Their goal is to get the ball into the endzone (or through the uprights); the defense's goal is to prevent that from happening. If the offense lost the ball through the end zone - who did their job?

I think you'd agree that not every score in football can be 100% attributed to the offense doing something right. Sometimes, plays happen because the defense makes a mistake, and sometimes an offensive player trips. Sometimes the defense benefits from the offense screwing up. In this case, the offense screwing up has a big penalty.

Losing the ball through the end zone effectively eliminates any other option that's been mentioned because they are just arbitrary placements: loss of downs, random loss of yardage, ball back where they got it, etc, vs the touchback being a specific and unchanging result.

To use your example, the offense didn't "complete the play" either but they are just supposed to get a do-over?

quote:

---

Half the distance to the goal penalty against the offense.

Why are you rewarded for being backed up against your own endzone?

Just move the chains forward whatever the length of the penalty is.

---

My idea is that if a team is inside the 10 or 20 where a penalty would be half the distance, the any penalty on the other team would result in similar lossed yardage. For example, if a team has the ball at the 8 going in where a penalty like offsides would be half the distance, or 4 yards, then a penalty on the offense would only have them give up 4 yards.

quote:

---

If you want my actual opinion, the only part of that rule I don't like is the spot of the ball. A fumble out of bounds results in spotting the ball where the fumble occurred (assuming the ball is fumbled forward which is always the case in an end zone fumble.) I get the association of it to the touchback, but I don't agree with that association since a touchback in every other circumstance requires an affirmative change in possession. Put it on the 2 or where the ball was fumbled if further up field and turn it over. The turnover is what makes the end zone special. The spot is arbitrarily punitive and awards the defense with a spot it didn't earn and in fact gave up in the possession.

---

Fair enough - the leagues have already determined that the spot after a touchback is somewhat arbitrary (20 vs 25) so perhaps in this particular case they could spot it at the 10 or at the spot of the fumble or something like you said.

quote:

---

Just a fun red herring to see if you take the bait to argue the straw man. I told you I wasn't proposing anything so just checking to see if you were paying attention. Again, the specific change isn't my point.

---

LOL - I said earlier on that I get irrationally upset when people argue against this rule. So that hook was shiny!

quote:

---

Sports rules you would like to see changed

---

Commercials only at the end of quarters/halves and no TV timeouts