From: floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich)
Subject: Re: taunting for 15
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin Tx.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:14:41 GMT

jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>>(John P. Gloria) writes:
>>>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>>>>(John P. Gloria) writes:

>>>Let me ask you this:  Do you think a player in any sport has not 
>>>intentionally injured someone purposely or with intent to maim?
>>>What are the odds that a player would do this for the benefit of his team?
>>
>>Yes, I know this.  I have never attempted to injure someone purposely
>>or intended to maim.  I'm not doubting that some people do; I don't think
>>all people do.  It's certainly not explicitly stated that this would be 
>>illegal, either.  I could hire 5 pro boxers for my basketball team.  At
>>the opening tipoff, they beat the hell out of the other team's starters.
>>We get 5 technical fouls and the boxers get ejected.  Who's gonna win the
>>game?
>>
>Floyd, Floyd, Floyd. Let's be real for a moment.  Why in heavens
>must you resort to hair brain scenarios that have nothing to do
>with reality.  Your example is as flaky as I have heard. No
>comment, beyond what I just stated.

So it was a hair-brain idea.  Just one that was radical enough to see if
there were ANY limits on how far you would go to achieve a competitive 
advantage.  Apparently there are some limits.

>>>I would be happy to go along with taunting rules if only the penalties
>>>excerised against players would be fair, across the board.  If the
>>>penalties are called fairly and justly, then I can accept that. However,
>>>to call an infraction on shooting imaginary guns one time of three is
>>>not right.  Do you disagree with this point?
>>
>>Such is the case with subjective calls.  Should we do away with pass
>>interference or holding because they're not always called the same?  
>>Judgment calls are a bitch when the judgment goes against you; they're 
>>fine when you get away with something.
>>
>We are discussing taunting, not other penalties.  No comment.

No, we are discussing why you don't like the taunting penalty.  One reason
you've stated is the subjectivity of the call.  I'm just pointing out that
there are plenty of good rules, the enforcement of which is very subjective.

Do you think that holding, PI, intentional grounding, unnecessary roughness,
personal fouls, and no-calls are bad rules just because they involve judgment?  
If not, then the same argument goes for taunting.  An OK penalty whose 
enforcement is up to judgment calls made by officials.  That doesn't make it a 
bad rule.  Even if it was a blown call (which we don't know since we don't 
know what was said on the field, that doesn't make anti-taunting rules 
inherently bad.

>>You would be in agreement with taunting penalties if they were objective
>>and consistent?  I thought you felt that taunting was a natural (and healthy?)
>>part of the game. Do you feel that the game cannot be played without taunting?
>>
>The whole issue of taunting and this thread is based on whether or
>not rule is fair or if it is fairly called on what is considered
>flagrant taunts.  Yes, I would be for the taunting rule if it was
>judged fairly.  

This was very unclear in your first post.  You said that taunting was a
natural part of any athletic competition (paraphrased).  You are now saying
that penalties to discourage taunting are OK, as long as they are consistent.
Which is it?

>Listen, if a jock is stupid enough to fight over a taunt, then I
>think he has major problems.  

If a jock is so insecure that he can't let his play speak for itself and
not have to resort to taunting, then I think he has major problems.  Especially
when he knows there are penalties for taunting.

>I am not the type to back down and if
>the other person was mad enough to fight, then I consider myself
>having the upper hand. Just MPO.  

Until the tauntee gets fed up, spears you at the 1 yard line, takes his 1/2
yard penalty and taunts you while you're being carried off the field.  
You seem to have condoned taunting and trying to gain competitive advantage
through injury.  Is that what you mean?



Floyd Goodrich
floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro