BALL OR BASE
 

I'm surprised nobody has written about it yet, but did you agree with the call in the Steelers/Ravens game? Did the ball break the plane of the goal line? Was it clear? Both feet were down, but did the ball cross the line beyond a shadow of a doubt?

Irregardless of that call, why don't we use the ball to determine out of bounds, forward progress, 1st Down or TD? Why do we use the base? Would it really be all that hard to use the ball if there is one? I would think, in this modern day of customization, wouldn't it be more accurate to designate any and all potential offensive ball carriers with a ball of some sort so that we can measure the ball and not the forwardmost part of the base?

I know most of us stopped "adding" a ball when we designate a runner because of the dreaded Electric Slide, but would it really be so hard to use an onfield BALL REF to mark the spot and then give your guy the ball? How long should that take? 3-seconds? How 'bout we allow 10?

Here's how:

• Offense "set"
• Defense "set"
• Offense audible(s): pivot(s) and/or advanced pivot(s) and/or motion(s)
• Defense audible(s): pivot(s) and/or advanced pivot(s) and/or motion(s)
• Offense calls play: "Passing" or "Run #34"
  • If "Run 34" - Defense sets Ball Ref; Offense lifts player, places ball in arm/hand; sets player back down (10-second max)
• Defense runs switch until #34 gets tackled, runs OB, forward progress stops or he scores, all of which the ball determines the spot.

What say YOU?

it would be extremly hard to make the call on anything if you use the ball to determine field positionltsplbll ltsplbll ltsplbll

I experimented with that when I was a kid. The reason was the 10 yard marker was of no use other than to mark the sidelines. I would mark the ball down where it was in relation to the field not the forward progress of the base. I could then actually use the 1st down marker with the sliding point to measure for 1st downs. It wasn't perfect, but it did add to the game.

thmbsp$

I'll just use my custom "Strertch Arm Strong" figure with the 100 yd arm for a TD.:rtfl:

I'm not too sure of who would want to vote and call them self a weeny, or a blonde that is clueless, both of which have nothing to do with the actual answer? For some reason, I do kind of like to use the ball. I think to use the ball, it could be considered as adding another dimension for the really good coaches who want a little "umpf" introduced to the game. With the custom players, would there be a concern of how far the ball goes beyond the exterior of the base?

At the same time, I think rules need to be universal and recognized as "official", so this might just be too much?

Just to be open minded, I did vote use the ball.

I am a weeny and I use the base, because that is the way you do it! ltsplbll

As they say....ppcrn

I don't know, is he in bounds on this catch or not? :D

Great point and queston,....I likes it! Yes, I said, ......."I likes it"!

I will reverse my vote if possible and go with base. It could be interesting one must admit!

He is out of bounds in my opinion and QB should not even throw the ball to him as he stands just like that.

UNPLUG FROM THE MATRIX
 

Free your minds! That was a loaded picture, Joe! In Chicago, his feet are in, so he's good to throw to. Remember when we were kids playing this game and almost everything goes? Why is it so hard to do now? mgngcrz

OUT OF BOUNDS!

:rnt;

rfr$

It does make the board larger if using the ball. Nice point!

IMO
 

He
 

is out of bounds, if someone tags him at the base , it's considered a tag, any part of the base is good, the base is OUT OF BOUNDS.ltsplbll

I don't consider this "forward thinking" as it has been covered many times by many board games, including this one. Base is a part of the player. Figure + Base = Player. To selectively exclude the base as a part of the player (an extension of it at the very least) would be going backward, not forward.

This is a board game, though the players do move. WHEN we finally come to grips with the fact that this is NOT REAL football, it never will be, and we are subjected to the limitations of the equipment we use, THEN we can get back to playing the friggin game instead of wasting so much time trying to disprove the obvious.

I don't do exercises in futility. Real football requires humans on a field. EF, MF, BB is a football SIMULATION at best. Base is part of the player, that receiver is out of bounds, the most widely used rules sets used today do not even require the "ball carrier" to carry a ball. :nhnh:

-Mike Pratt

Poll says it all!
 

You are a forward thinker if you agree with Jimbo.
A weeny if you don't agree with Jimbo.
You are okay if you are in the middle.
You are dumb if you don't care.

One word for you. Solitaire! :rtfl: We'll take the guys from Illinois down here where they can have a voice! :nhnh:


I say Base. Weenie this! :rtfl: :rtfl: :rtfl:

Stand up to what is right Joe! thmbsp$

Don't be a weeny! :rtfl: :rtfl: :rtfl: :rtfl: thmbsp$ thmbsp$ thmbsp$ thmbsp$

Nice Scrimmaging with you brother. Hope to see you in the spring. ppls$ ppls$

Jimbo has a voice that I hear on almost a daily basis. I just don't pay that much attention to what he is saying. :D

I posted on this mainly because I knew he was sans PC and couldn't fire back. But my conscience got the better of me, eventually. I invoked "Man Law", called to needle him about it on the phone. His response was "You DO realize how old that post was don't you?" YEP! And? Eliminating the base was just too inviting and ripe for pummeling. Jimbo IS a legit rules guy. He musta had brain fade or was really bored. He knows better. So, I just couldn't resist. :rtfl:

All in good fun. Play whatever way that get's your freak on! It's all good.
-Mike Pratt