Started By
Message
re: moral equivalency? hunh vs flopping
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:20 pm to northalabamacracker
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:20 pm to northalabamacracker
Why or you asking?
0
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:21 pm to northalabamacracker
I'm not the one trying to call out a referee for being unqualified, but nice try.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:23 pm to TTsTowel
quote:
You forgot to ask for his phone number, breh.
You obviously didn't read the thread mr insider. Nar posted that in response to "look at me I'm a ref (most hated people in sports by the way) demanding specific youtube clips of refs being out of position.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:27 pm to northalabamacracker
I read most of the thread prior to my first post on page 6, bro. I'm not taking either posters' side.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:30 pm to Ross
Who did that Ross? I don't know that he is a ref, but suspect he is because he loves for everyone to think that he is. But by his own
Admission he is barely more than a high school ref. Who cares.
I don't value his opinion because he claims to be a ref, but can't control his temper, has this look at me I'm a ref attitude, and posts on a SEC football message board when he isn't a fan of any SEC team. He posts here to inflate his ego by being the boards self appointed ref.
frick him.
Admission he is barely more than a high school ref. Who cares.
I don't value his opinion because he claims to be a ref, but can't control his temper, has this look at me I'm a ref attitude, and posts on a SEC football message board when he isn't a fan of any SEC team. He posts here to inflate his ego by being the boards self appointed ref.
frick him.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:38 pm to narddogg81
quote:
A little poll. Who here is for hunh and their ability to exploit the rules to the fullest to gain offensive advantages such as stopping defensive substitution, putting pressure on the officials, etc, yet find the idea of defensive players Dropping for less than traumatic injuries reprehensible? Its just within the rules (how does a player know whether he is having heat stroke or is just tired? Hes not a doctor, why chance it? ). How many of you would be screaming for a new rule to stop it if it suddenly became prevalent? How many of the brave coaches championing the current set of rules would be screaming for a new rule? Ill hang up and listen.
As much as I detest this post for being incredibly whiny, I'll give my opinion:
The HUNH (i.e. snapping the ball as quickly as possible) doesn't violate any rules nor is it unethical. It provides the offense an advantage, but it isn't an unfair one. If they don't substitute, the defense isn't going to get a good opportunity to substitute either. Both parties have the same amount of time pre-snap to prepare for play.
Faking an injury, however, does provide what I'd argue is an unfair advantage. And if you want to argue that it isn't an unfair advantage, then I'd argue it is most certainly unethical, and I believe someone posted an excerpt before where it is officially given the description of unethical by the ruling parties of college football.
Therefore, while I believe phrases such as "exploit the rules" make your premise a very flawed one, anyone that argues that they want to preserve the integrity of the game but in the same breath argues that faking injuries is what they'd advocate because fast paced offenses aren't going away is taking contradictory stances.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:40 pm to arrakis
quote:it was posted originally from my phone, there were several spelling errors that i fixed. I edited before you ever even replied, was edited at 12:03, your first reply was at 12:19. Did I have a premonition or something? Good work though, inspector
Yes, you changed it after I exposed your ignorance
quote:no, I do hope they fake injuries as as flop to make a point
Ashamed of your own words, are you?
This post was edited on 3/9/14 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:43 pm to Ross
I agree Ross. I think the NCAA should go back to the old clock rules though.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:45 pm to northalabamacracker
Agree completely. I don't understand why the argument was for a ten second mandatory period where you can't snap the ball instead of just going back to the 25 second clock and let the ref mark the ball ready for play.
If you are going to have 25% of the playclock be forced to run off anyway, what the hell is the point?
If you are going to have 25% of the playclock be forced to run off anyway, what the hell is the point?
Posted on 3/9/14 at 12:50 pm to northalabamacracker
quote:I agree with that. Either that or fully adopt the nfl rules and procedures on the subject. This half and half is a mess
I agree Ross. I think the NCAA should go back to the old clock rules though.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:06 pm to Ross
quote:exploit is the proper term, because what is at issue, hunh offenses lining up immediately before the play is called, freezing defensive personnel on the field with the threat of a snap (often times before the play is called) was an unintended consequence of a previous rule change was designed to shorten games. Was an implementation of the nfl clock rule but failed to include other nfl rules abd procedures that regulate personal activities. I'm not blaming the hunh coaches for sniffing it out and exploiting it, but I think its problem that needs addressing. A clock rule that changes the nature of the game in unintended ways and confers an advantage to one side that didn't previously exist should be changed or there should be other rules to rectify. That's why this is a rules question in the first place, because a rule change caused the situation in the first place
Therefore, while I believe phrases such as "exploit the rules" make your premise a very flawed one
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:13 pm to narddogg81
You continue to use words like "exploit" and "problem". I don't see why it's a problem. It's certainly not an unfair advantage, as no additional luxury has been provided to the offense that wasn't already in existence and there is no additional time allocated to the offense to do whatever they intend to do, they just intend to do it faster.
And yeah, if the defense cannot substitute fast enough they aren't going to be able to substitute. It isn't impossible to substitute when a team is snapping the ball quickly. There have actually been some cool videos demonstrating this posted on this board.
Allegedly, this is a rules question because of player safety.
And yeah, if the defense cannot substitute fast enough they aren't going to be able to substitute. It isn't impossible to substitute when a team is snapping the ball quickly. There have actually been some cool videos demonstrating this posted on this board.
quote:
That's why this is a rules question in the first place, because a rule change caused the situation in the first place
Allegedly, this is a rules question because of player safety.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 3:16 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
Flopping was bad enough already. Now that the NCAA is giving in to all the have-nots and allowing the HUNH to continue as-is, the flopping will only get worse.
I guess nobody can stop you from being piss-ant little badly-conditioned bitches if that's what you want to be.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 3:34 pm to beatbammer
So, let me get this straight, all the people who come from HUNH offense want to regulate onfield injury timeouts whether they be true or false. Whose wanting to change the rules now?
Give another advantage to the offense is what they're saying. What do you need defense for? That's right API, you just need an average or sub-par defense to compete against the best with the best. Why have a complete team!
I think it's a little bit hypocritical to complain and cry about the 10 second rule, then come in here and want to regulate injury timeouts. You people want your cake and it it, too!
Give another advantage to the offense is what they're saying. What do you need defense for? That's right API, you just need an average or sub-par defense to compete against the best with the best. Why have a complete team!
I think it's a little bit hypocritical to complain and cry about the 10 second rule, then come in here and want to regulate injury timeouts. You people want your cake and it it, too!
Posted on 3/9/14 at 3:40 pm to TTsTowel
quote:
I'm OK with a player faking an injury.
Although we share a state, this comment by TT perfectly describes the difference between the two fan bases. I would boo Nick Saban if our players start pulling this shite.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 4:04 pm to Ross
quote:are you trying to argue that the change to the 40 second play clock did not change the snap dynamics and substitution dynamics that existed prior to the rule change in favor of an offense an offense that plays in a particualr style? are you saying that the nfl did not handle these (apparently imaginary) changes with ref instructions? because if so you are just completely and willfully wrong. i wish people would just admit when they have a bias. the rule ended up changing things it wasnt intended to, just because you happen to like the changes because you feel it benefits your team doesn't mean they didnt happen
as no additional luxury has been provided to the offense that wasn't already in existenc
quote:it certainly was couched in those terms, presumably to get it through in a non rules change year, but everyone knew that was just a pretext. there may well end up being a player safety issue to it, but the kind of statistics you would need to prove it is not currently recorded.
Allegedly, this is a rules question because of player safety.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 4:07 pm to beatbammer
quote:sub poll. who actually thinks alabama's defensive players are any less well-conditioned than other teams players, instead of just spouting the itat groupthink catch phrase because you think it scores you some kind of point?
I guess nobody can stop you from being piss-ant little badly-conditioned bitches if that's what you want to be.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 4:52 pm to Ross
quote:
The HUNH (i.e. snapping the ball as quickly as possible) doesn't violate any rules nor is it unethical. It provides the offense an advantage, but it isn't an unfair one. If they don't substitute, the defense isn't going to get a good opportunity to substitute either. Both parties have the same amount of time pre-snap to prepare for play.
Faking an injury, however, does provide what I'd argue is an unfair advantage. And if you want to argue that it isn't an unfair advantage, then I'd argue it is most certainly unethical, and I believe someone posted an excerpt before where it is officially given the description of unethical by the ruling parties of college football.
Therefore, while I believe phrases such as "exploit the rules" make your premise a very flawed one, anyone that argues that they want to preserve the integrity of the game but in the same breath argues that faking injuries is what they'd advocate because fast paced offenses aren't going away is taking contradictory stances.
all of this
my team does not and probably will not use the HUNH but the objections raised to it and the intent by some (including my team) to use fake injuries to slow it down is detestable and should be removed from the game by enforcement of already existing rules.
If the respect for the not faking injury rule is inadequate then they rule should be enforced by making any player who stops the game clock because of injury stay out of the game for a sustained period of time. If it is about player safety then they need time for the medical staff to evaluate player. If the player is essential then the team can call a time out and potentially preserve their ability to leave the player in the game (if he is able to play).
Posted on 3/9/14 at 5:29 pm to molsusports
To add an anti-flopping rule, is as bad as the 10 sec. rule that was just tabled. Who would decide who was flopping and who was not. Another judgement call added when not needed.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 5:39 pm to bamamonty
quote:
So, let me get this straight, all the people who come from HUNH offense want to regulate onfield injury timeouts whether they be true or false. Whose wanting to change the rules now?
Give another advantage to the offense is what they're saying. What do you need defense for? That's right API, you just need an average or sub-par defense to compete against the best with the best. Why have a complete team!
I think it's a little bit hypocritical to complain and cry about the 10 second rule, then come in here and want to regulate injury timeouts. You people want your cake and it it, too!
Where in my post did I advocate for regulating injury timeouts?
But I'll have to give it to you that you set-up one helluva strawman and you knocked that sucker flat.
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News