View Single Post
Old 05-29-2010, 06:34 PM   #16
Brad O.
1,549
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 792
Brad O. will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
But why stop there? Why not disqualify the entire team if they celebrate too much at the end of a game, and declare the other team the winner?

I'm all for disciplining "taunters" after the fact with fines, suspensions etc. But reversing the entire outcome of a play (or game) is asinine overkill - or, to trot out one of my favorite allegories, it's like William Tell using a cannon to shoot the apple off his son's head.
I mostly agree with you, though this is substantially different than what you initially wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
If you don't want to get "taunted," play better!
I don't know that I would use the word overkill, but I agree that reversing the outcome of actual plays is the wrong way to go. I do like in-game consequences rather than post-game punishments, though. Fines aren't a realistic solution at the college level (or even the NFL, really). I guess suspensions could work, but that seems like overkill to me. It's also potentially subject to teams working the system. I generally like the way the NFL does things, with a stiff penalty (usually 15 yards) following the play. So a touchdown would stand, but you assess 15 yards on the extra point or the kickoff (opponent's choice).

I might be willing to go with touchdown reversal, etc., if the rules for what constitutes "taunting" were more clearly defined and evenly enforced. For now, I think a post-play penalty is more appropriate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Some of us need to do what Mr. T. suggested in that Snickers commercial that aired in Britain but was kept off the air by the P.C. Thought Police on this side of the pond:

Get some nuts.
P.C. Thought Police? I think you're confusing censoring of political speech with protective parents and social conservatives who find that sort of language obscene. There's nothing politically correct about avoiding that use of the word "nuts"; it has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. That's Puritanism, not political correctness.

Then again, how can I argue with someone who looks to a Mr. T commercial for wisdom?
Brad O. is offline   Reply With Quote