TexasCHLforum.com

this goes along with the progressive theory that we shouldn't be able to defend ourselves. We should just give the "losers" a chance to "score".

I see this "mercy" rule applied in my daughter's softball games and it's okay. The girls know they've been handed a beating and it helps keep it from getting too ridiculous. If they don't want to end the game in football then have the TD count for the stats, but don't add any more points to the score. IDK, just a thought.

A fine or any penalty is stupid. Is the team that is winning just supposed to roll over? 8 year olds aren't really going to understand this rule. Isn't it still mob mentality in games at this age? That seems to be kinda what I remember from watching the little ones play may years ago.

If they need to have a mercy rule it should end the game. It's cruel to require someone to continue playing and penalize them if they score. Incredibly heartless, to be honest.

tbrown wrote:If they need to have a mercy rule it should end the game. It's cruel to require someone to continue playing and penalize them if they score. Incredibly heartless, to be honest.

Exactly my point.

It does actually lend it self to some creativity by the coaching staff. For instance, when we know we are going to be in a situation where we could be well ahead, one of the offensive linemen, generally a guard, it switched to full back, and told to go for the 1 hole, off center. Generally its a no yardage or short yardage play that gets some kids that otherwise would not touch the ball the opportunity to carry. They also learn some valualble lessons on the importance of blocking.

And yes, the rules are a bit crazy. We have a 42 page rule book for elementary kids playing football. One of those rules is we accept the NCAA football rules, so pretty much 41 pages have nothing to do about playing football. They are all there becuase somebody, over the last 45 yeard the league has been around, tried to cheat.

Other than the "nuclear" score rule other crazy ones include
"no coach can use a cell phone at any time during the game" (which is an issue for my LEO's and firefighters that are on call. I end up holding phones for them"
"once the game starts no one other than the coaches can be with the players, even during half time, and the coaches can not leave the players for any reason, doing so prohibits them from returning to the side line."
"if you choose to sue the league, you must step down from any position you hold for the duration of the lawsuit"

It goes on, and generally it about trying to provide a level playing field for the kids to play football and eliminate any potential cheating. I am so glad the "Friday night Tykes" choose San Antonio rather than Houston for thier show. I didn't want to be anywhere near that.

The Annoyed Man wrote:
This is an insidious lesson that is and has been demonstrably detrimental to the success of our society and culture. Is there any other country besides the U.S. that fines teams, suspends coaches, and reprimands players for being TOO successful? This is all progressivist crap.

Gosh, TAM, it sounds like good training to me. How else are we going to teach our kids that our 'progressive' tax code is normal and right? Yeah, earn more money, go into a higher tax bracket. Then, if you're lucky, you get hit with the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax). Soon enough, you've learned that it's better to earn a little bit less, because if you pass that threshold, you'll end up taking home a LOT less.

Personally, I think it's a great lesson to teach our kids about adulthood.

[sarcasm off]

If you're that far ahead, just call the game.
First world problems.

I call hooey on any mercy rules. There is no mercy given in the real world. No one in the real world is going to step in to stop your feelings from being hurt. What a nation of pansies the left is trying to develop. If a team is getting creamed and it hurts their feelings they can always just concede the game.

And I don't see the point....the whole purpose of the game is to get good and win. You get good by playing those that are better than you. A wide open game is a chance to get some play time for players that usually warm the bench. It should also be an opportunity for the losing team to try something different or out of the ordinary since they're going to lose anyway. Any little darlings that can't stand to have their feelings hurt don't belong on the field to begin with.

And paying a fine? When are men going to start being men and stand up to all this feminization and wussification of boys? Organize a league for men who want their boys to be boys or just refuse to participate in organizations with idiotic rules.

I played games when I was 8 to have fun, not to win.

To each his own I guess.

philip964 wrote:Usually the game ends when a certain point difference is reached.

A mercy rule most of us agree is appropriate.

This sounds like a way to shrink a league or reduce it's skill level pretty quick.

There are few football programs that use a game ending mercy rule, the only I can think of right now is six man football that ends the game when a 45 point differential is reached any time after the first half. You're more likely to find a running clock rule but that may not even apply in a youth game because coaches have a minimum play requirement for each player. If they don't get their players their minimum plays, the coaches can face fines and suspensions.

Connecticut has a rule subjecting to a coach to a fine if they win by I believe more than 50 points. This is at the high school level.

Teamless wrote:So it is not unusual.

Just because something isn't unusual doesn't make it any less dumb. A lot of people voted for Obama twice, after all.

didnt say it wasnt dumb, just not localized to the news article in reference in the OP

mamabearCali wrote:If they are going to gave a mercy rule (which is perfectly fine)....then play needs to stop and the game is over. There....problem fixed....no need for fines and suspensions.

How about a more effective mercy rule, where you drag the losing team aside in private to tell them to hitch up their skirts and try harder, rather than doing it over the PA system?

Can't the losing team just forfeit the game at any time if it's hurting their feelings so badly?

bigity wrote:I played games when I was 8 to have fun, not to win.

To each his own I guess.

And what, losing is more fun than winning? If you're going to play, why not play to win? If one team is taking the game seriously and the other doesn't care about the outcome, then the team that doesn't care is cheating the other team out of a real contest where everyone is doing their best. I don't see the point in playing against a team that doesn't care about winning.

Sports competitions need to reflect real life. Second place is the first loser. Mercy is seldom learned on the field of battle. Mercy is taught by parents and family and faith. One can be both merciful and ruthless. Both have their place. What needs to be taught is when to apply either.