Letters to the Editor
fourpound
Published Letters: 105 Editor's Choice: 34
-
Isn't the Winter Olympic Hype Always Like This?
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Boy, the hype from Lillehammer, I'm still trying to get over that. I was the deciding vote in an argument over whether there were actually Olympics this year, and to answer it, I had to add two years to the date of the last summer Olympics.
But, they're never hyped. The only huge hype I remember from the Winter Games is when someone got clubbed in the knees. My next most vivid memory is some guy called Eddy the Eagle, I think he was a really bad ski jumper, but I'm not sure.
Anyway, my point is that you are not running through the raindrops, but that you probably made an effort to learn about the Winter Games in previous years. And the memories of the never-ending Olympic hype may be from when the Summer and Winter Games took place in the same year.
-
Only 2 Road Teams Won
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Carolina won at Chicago
Pittsburg won at Indy
Denver and Seattle both won at home.
-
My Version of Instant Replay
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In overtime, all calls are reviewed by the replay booth which says that the NFL already has people there. My suggestion is this:
Have two people who are reviewing in the replay booth (or separate booths). They both review the play. The field referee stays on the field and does NOT review the play. If the two reviewers both think the call should be overturned, they overrule the field call, and the call is reversed. If either one of them side with the onfield call, then the call stands.
This saves the time of the referee walking over to the sidelines putting on the hood and walking back to the field of play, which in and of itself lasts two minutes. If one reviewer looks at the play for 10 seconds and decides they had it right the first time, then he/she signals in and the game can resume regardless of whether or not the other person is still looking at the play. If a decision can't be determined after 30 seconds (or whatever time limit you want) then the play is determined inconclusive and the field call stands.
Now we have a much faster system with more people seeing the play and less chance of a misinterpretation of the rules. And at the most, the NFL has to hire one more person for each game.
-
Touchback Rule/Force Out Rule/Pass Interference
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Force out rule was put in place to prevent piggy-backing, and has only existed for 10 to 15 years. Never was a problem. If we are going to compare basketball and football rules, Joe Blow, a good defensive play in basketball is to force someone to the baseline and squeeze off every bit of court available to him or her, so that the offensive player is forced out of bounds (turnover) or trapped. Hence, it is a situation to be avoided. Like in football, the out of bounds line is like an extra defender. In football, once the receiver has touched the ball, it is fair and expected for the defender to hit the receiver. If that hit forces him out of bounds before he can establish posession (two feet), then it should be considered a good play. A normal tackle does not consist of picking a player up and carrying him; hence piggy-backing a player out of bounds should be considered differently. Comparing force out rule to a basketball shooting foul is ridiculous.
The touchback rule penalizes players who recklessly try to reach the ball over the goal line. Thomas Jones got away with it in the Bears game because of a defensive penalty. But it is a good rule. You must be careful with the ball near the goal line. Most of the time this rule happens because of bad risks (Thomas Jones) or sheer carelessness (Champ Bailey).
As for pass interference, can't we have two different penalties, like the face-mask. I don't like the college rule of 15 yards, because if defender is beat, the smart play is to tackle the receiver before he can catch the ball. But in many cases the play is questionable or incidental. A 15 yard penalty against Asante Samuels is not game changing like a 40 yard penalty. This takes some power away from the referee in altering a game. We can also then completely scrap the judgement about whether a ball was catchable or not. Either way it's a penalty, figure out if it was flagrant or incidental.
-
response to Joe Blow
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Force out: As for a defender carrying a player out of bounds, that is different, and I addressed that. Otherwise, it is the risk of throwing to the sidelines. Make a good throw and it's not an issue. The receiver is not forced out of bounds on every single sideline reception. Usually this follows a slightly inaccurate pass from the quarterback.
As far as the touchback rule, dsholt wrote much better than I, so I will just quote the posting:
-----------
The better answer about the "touchback for a fumble through the endzone question" is that the endzone is essentially the territory of the team guarding it. The whole point of the game is to protect your endzone and to penetrate the opposing team's with possession of the ball. If you on offense lose the ball into the other team's endzone, then you basically are losing the ball to them. It doesn't matter whether you brought the ball down 98-yards or whatever, you lost control of it on their territory and it reverts back to them. So your question is answered by the basic philosophy and point of the game. Not a big mystery and not particularly offensive, I think.
-------------