Rule Change Proposal--Discuss

[blindref757]

Throwing a punch and missing or unsuccessful swinging at an opponent does not result in ejection.

As it is now, we are supposed to eject for a swing and a miss.  I think it would benefit us, the players, and the coaches to give us some discretion here and allow for a player to be removed from the field for one play so that the coaches can talk some sense into them.  The 15 yard penalty is still enforced

Another possible scenario is to penalize with either or both...a 15 yard penalty and/or a charged timeout...so that that player can be dealt with by coaches.

What do ya'll think?

[JasonTX]

Steal some rules from hockey and make them go into a penalty box for a certain amount of time. 

[Arbitrator]

Throwing a punch and missing or unsuccessful swinging at an opponent does not result in ejection.

As it is now, we are supposed to eject for a swing and a miss.  I think it would benefit us, the players, and the coaches to give us some discretion here and allow for a player to be removed from the field for one play so that the coaches can talk some sense into them.  The 15 yard penalty is still enforced

Another possible scenario is to penalize with either or both...a 15 yard penalty and/or a charged timeout...so that that player can be dealt with by coaches.

What do ya'll think?

 

I absolutely believe that this will never happen. A player should be coached well enough not to retaliate even if someone swings at him first!

If a change of this magnitude does come to fruition, then it will be by coaches on the committee or a majority of coaches who do not want to accept responsibility for their players actions!

Passage of a measure like this, just gives us, as officials, more to be responsible for, instead of making our jobs easier in this particular area!

[NVFOA_Ump]

To me this one sounds like a non-starter.  IMHO there is no need or reason to loosen up the rule since an intentional punch, with contact or without has no place in the game.  Throwing a punch is not part of football.

[Etref]

 

To me this one sounds like a non-starter.  IMHO there is no need or reason to loosen up the rule since an intentional punch, with contact or without has no place in the game.  Throwing a punch is not part of football.

 

[Arbitrator]

To me this one sounds like a non-starter.  IMHO there is no need or reason to loosen up the rule since an intentional punch, with contact or without has no place in the game.  Throwing a punch is not part of football.

 

Totally! And if "throwing punches" without ever incurring penalties were to become the norm, then I could just visualize the more storied and well-heeled football programs hiring on the likes of a Sugar Ray Leonard or George Foreman type, as say, "Coordinator of Retaliatory Punching!"

Furthermore, I could see myself asking the Head Coach during Pregame Conference: "Coach! Who will be your designated punchers in the game tonight? Now you do realize that they're perfectly OK as long as they don't make contact or as long as they're not using brass knucks or any sharp objects!"   

[bkdow]

Not in favor of changing.  Intent to hit (or kick or spit on) should be penalized the same as succeeding.

[VA-HL]

I agree with bkdow...absolutely should not be changed.

[bossman72]

I also vote no

[TXMike]

We "reward" the kid because he is a crappy fighter ? ! ?! !? !?  Heck no!  Like was said above, there is no place for a punch PERIOD in the game.  The beauty (to me anyway) of football has always been how it is sheer outright aggression up to a point and then it stops.  There are things players do to one another between the whistles that would get them imprisoned for years if it just happened on the street.  Being able to make that mental and physical adjustment requires the development of considerable self-discipline.  That is why I think it is the greatest sport on earth.    Punching is not part of the game, whether you are a good puncher or not.

[NVFOA_Ump]

.... Punching is not part of the game, whether you are a good puncher or not.