Be Careful When Streamlining Rule Books

[Reginald Rutledge]

When the Shootout rulebook was created, it had more than 90 pages. Some things were obvious to a person who had football intellect but for others, it was not so obvious. Some years later, I got a paralegal degree where I had to train under some pretty good law professors. They told me never leave anything to interpretation because it became the judgment moreso of the individual, not the law.

Having written many engineering documents and tech journals over the years, it was always common practice as an engineer to make things "idiot-proof". That way, anyone could take your test plan and run the test cases because you would have simplified it.

I know some of us look at rules as useless readings but it does have meaning. When I wrote the rulebook, I felt that every page was important because it gave explanation to most interpretations. I saw a game this weekend where there was a question on linemen being checked in as a receiver. In the original rulebook, it clearly is stated that "On every play, the offensive coach must make aware to the official and opposing coach that said lineman is an eligible receiver".

The question was argued that this was not stated in the rulebook. In our quest to streamline things, we may do ourselves a bit of unjust in that a relevant argument can be taken for such a case. If the rule would have been made clear in the rulebook, then that coach has no case. However, because it is not found in the rulebook, he can and should argue the validity of the rule.

So essentially, instead of streamlining a rulebook that leaves out much for interpretation, add to a rulebook even if it has 100 pages. This represents the laws that you are playing by and abide by as a league. I am all for taking out "fat" but I did not write the rules just to be writing but I tried to foresee scenarios and cases like the one mentioned above to stay "ahead of the game".

If it were my call, we still would be playing with a rulebook of right at 100 pages and would probably add more pages as it is warranted. If I ever decide to have a tournament or league, I definitely will go back to the original rulebook and try to sync it with the streamlined version. I don't like to leave anything to chance or better yet, interpretation.

Reginald Rutledge

[The Rookie]

I think you are correct in not leaving anything out so there will no problems but in the game in question that was not what happened.

The problem was that I checked him in as a lineman and the offical who was doing stats and running 5 clocks and reffing did not here me.

To me if he did not here me to a 100% degree there should not have been a foul called.

Also I coached High school football for over 18 years and no the rules very well. The high schools in Texas are very much in line with the college rules.

The rule set Reggie is talking about was made for the NFL and in college and High school you do not have to declare a lineman as eligiable most people do but you dont have to .
If you dont and you throw a pass and that lineman goes down field or touches the ball or catches a pass then there will be a pen.

I talked to Greg this weekend and he said you have to declare a lineman as a Reciever but after reading the colleges rule from first to last page there is no rule I thing it should be change or added.

[Reginald Rutledge]

it is still your job (and any of us) to make sure the ref hears you!!!

You even said that the ref was doing stats, handling 5 clocks, and trying to work the camera as well. That's a lot of pressure for one person to do all those things!

Now, if that is the case, I probably would have tapped the ref on the arm and told him just to make sure he knows. Or I would have screamed out loud that "I have a lineman eligible." Chances are, I would have told the other team too just so they would be alerted to the situation.

This was a good experience for you and it will ring true for others. I do think that rule need to be put back into the CBSMF rulebook immediately (as well as a few others) so that up the road, no heart-feelings are hurt. I also think there needs to be a distinct designation of what a lineman is from the standpoint of how a figure should look to the eligible number.

I've got linemen from the 50's and 40's who wear #'s in the 30's. I could be sneaky and just let him run free and throw to him and then say, "He's a receiver because he played TE". It's so many underhanded ways to bend rules in your favor. That's why I had 100 pages of information. It stopped some of those bendable rules!

So yes, things like what you speak of Doug, need to be addressed. But I would also caution to you and everyone else, don't just know the rules when they work in your favor. Know them when they are right or wrong for everyone.

Reg

[mozeek]

In the game of football at ANY LEVEL....AN ELGIBLE LINEMAN (# FROM 50 - 79) HAS TO BE DECLARED...EVEN IN LITTLE LEAGUE OR POP WARNER EVERY PLAY HE IS ON THE FIELD FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN BEING A LINEMAN.......COME ON COACH.....

IF A BLOCKER FIGURE HAS AN ELGIBLE # ON HIM THEN IN MY HUMBLE OPINION I DO NOT SEE WHY THE OPPONENT HAS TO BE INFORMED?

[The Rookie]

I agree with you also to a degree

I had told him 2 times in the same series right before that play that he heard .

In the end it is my problem because it effected me very much.

I had just hit a 3rd and 20 my back was behind the secondary and runs stright and true. the score was 10-6 Barry .

You just hate after many hours of work to have the game change on an officals call that I THINK WAS A VERBAL MISCOMMUNICATION ON MIKES PART>
I told Mike later on my headstone you will read "I SAID IT YOU DID NOT HERE IT"

Very frustrating.

It is not even a rule that you have to declare a lineman eligible.
But I am the only one that s knows it.

[The Rookie]

You are wrong Mozeek

He is not ELGIBLE if he goes down field or touches a ball on a pass play.

But I am not sayiong that has anything to do with the play but it needs to be changed.
I declared him as a receiver

[mozeek]

FUNNY WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU READ THE RULES......



5.4 Passing
5.4.1 Eligible Receivers
5.4.1.1 A forward pass is the forward movement of the ball to an eligible receiver. Eligible receivers are tight ends, wide receivers, running backs and quarterbacks who are either lateral with or downfield from the quarterback at the time the pass is to be executed.
5.4.1.2 Eligible receivers are those who are numbered 1 - 49 and 80 - 89. Those who are numbered 50 - 79 and 90 - 99 are considered ineligible receivers, but may become eligible by notifying the referee and opposing coach and then lining the player up in an eligible position.

LIKE I STATED IF THE FIGURE IS THE QUESTION THEN ADDRESS THE FIGURE ISSUE BUT IT CLEARLY STATES IN THE RULES WHAT NUMBERS ARE ELGIBLE WITHOUT NOTIFYING THE REF AND OPPOSING COACH......

[sweetka]

Originally Posted by The Rookie

I agree with you also to a degree

I had told him 2 times in the same series right before that play that he heard .

In the end it is my problem because it effected me very much.

I had just hit a 3rd and 20 my back was behind the secondary and runs stright and true. the score was 10-6 Barry .

You just hate after many hours of work to have the game change on an officals call that I THINK WAS A VERBAL MISCOMMUNICATION ON MIKES PART>
I told Mike later on my headstone you will read "I SAID IT YOU DID NOT HERE IT"

Very frustrating.

It is not even a rule that you have to declare a lineman eligible.


But I am the only one that s knows it.

Losses have a profound way of making you understand things about your team, and yourself. The question is what should you do with YOUR TEAM to ensure it doesn't happen. Now matter what communication is two way. What if Mike, and I am not defending him, said you never said anything? Sender + receiver+ acknowledgement from receiver=two way communication. If that did not happen then share the blame, correct your team, then move on.

Regarding the rules? If a man spent countless years to cover every nuance of a ruleset through various corrections of controversial or techinical discrepancies in the past, then it should take an equal amount of time to streamline them.

Just my thouhgts.

[The Rookie]

Kenny
I dont know if I understand what your intent is fully but I said in the third like of what you copyed

In the end it is my problem because it effected me very much.

I have to live with it and make out of it what I can.

Me and Mike talked to 4:00Am Sun. night .
It was good for me to talk with him about the situation we are good and my take was I saifd it : He did not here me -

It all falls on me in the long run . End of story