NCAA Considering Harsher Celebration Penalties
So, the NCAA is considering harsher celebration penalties, possibly making celebration a live-ball foul instead of dead-ball foul. In essence, this would most strongly punish players that celebrate before they enter the endzone by placing the foul at the point at which the player begins celebrating, thus actually taking a TD away. In other words, if a receiver breaks away for a long TD and begins celebrating at the three-yard line before he enters the endzone, the foul is at the three-yard line, the TD doesn't count, and, presumably, the 15-yard foul means that the new line of scrimmage is at the 18-yard line. The NCAA claims that it wishes to limit players taunting opposing players, so it's unclear whether such a penalty could be called for the usual dancing you see or only overt insulting of opposing players. However, since in the celebration rules there is to my knowledge no distinction between taunting and dancing, we can assume deteriming what kind of celebration is worth a penalty is, as now, up to the ref's discretion.
While I see and admire the purpose of the celebration rules--they make the game more civil and discourage behavior that could lead to fights--I also really dislike them for two reasons. First of all, football is an emotional game and, when someone makes big play, that player is going to celebrate. End of story. Second of all--and this is where I really have a problem with these rules--the refs essentially have to rely on their own judgment when calling these penalties. We often see light celebration punished and more excessive cases go unnoticed.
The new rules would put even more power in the refs' hands. Is that really something fans of college football want in a day and age when we already have to endure weekly games that the refs determine the outcomes of? I guarantee you that it will be no time at all before someone dances as he enters the endzone on a late, potentially game-winning TD, only to find out that the TD has been called back by the refs. Then, the next week, you'll see someone the same thing for another team and get away with it. We don't need that kind of situation.
So, NCAA, if you're listening, please scrap this stupid rules change. For the fans' sake.
0 recs |
8 comments
|
Comments
This is stupid.
If there was one rule I could change, it would be the SEC rule against students entering the playing area. I feel like every other conference let’s their students celebrate. I feel like sometimes it takes the fun and joy out of a big win.
Yeah. The fans should have been able to strom the CLA after the Florida win...
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans. http://www.garnetandblackattack.com
by Gamecock Man on Feb 11, 2009 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
We already...
Had that really contriversial call last year were the BYU player through the ball in the air. This rule could only make it worse.
That's a great example...
That was some serious BS.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans. http://www.garnetandblackattack.com
by Gamecock Man on Feb 12, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
Great, give the refs more ways to screw the underdogs
Second of all—and this is where I really have a problem with these rules—the refs essentially have to rely on their own judgment when calling these penalties.
E.g. Florida-Vanderbilt, 2005. Now instead of merely complicating Vanderbilt’s two point try by inventing an Earl Bennett celebration penalty, the refs could just take away Bennett’s touchdown. It certainly makes it easier to insure the correct team wins. Sounds like a great change to me.
Don’t the busybodies in Indianapolis have enough else to worry about? Oh, right, I forgot — college football is now totally devoid of serious cheating, so that frees up their time to worry about such gross incivility.
I remember that call...
and it is still one of the worst I’ve ever seen. I think Earl Bennett’s shoulder moved about half an inch. Some celebration.
by The Feathered Warrior on Feb 12, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't want to say it in my original write-up because I didn't want to sound like the whining fan of an underdog team...
But we all know that when referee discretion is involved, it usually favors the big-name, powerhouse team. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I’d say this rule sounds like a good tool for managing the outcomes of surprising upset bids.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans. http://www.garnetandblackattack.com
by Gamecock Man on Feb 12, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions
Screw that
I know exactly what you mean about “sound[ing] like the whining fan of an underdog team…” But just because it’s convenient to [mis]use as an excuse doesn’t mean it’s not true.
At any rate, it pretty much holds true across all sports. I’m a Patriots fan and it would be absurd for me to believe that they didn’t benefit from calls from about 2003-04 onward. It’s human nature for people to see what they expect to see.

by 













