[Roberton3]

The rules are there to prevent the league from getting sued.  The rules are there to mitigate injury while allowing for the excitement of big hits.  The rules are there to allow leeway in official interpretation on the field, in the moment.  They're there to be whatever the refs need them to be.

I was talking about this with a friend who's a lawyer.  He said that in other contexts, having a rule and being lax in enforcement usually puts you in a worse legal position than having no rule at all.  Do the lawyers here agree?  If so, it seems like the Pac-12 might have some problems down the road.

[Roberton3]

The rules are there to prevent the league from getting sued.  The rules are there to mitigate injury while allowing for the excitement of big hits.  The rules are there to allow leeway in official interpretation on the field, in the moment.  They're there to be whatever the refs need them to be.

I was talking about this with a friend who's a lawyer.  He said that in other contexts, having a rule and being lax in enforcement usually puts you in a worse legal position than having no rule at all.  Do the lawyers here agree?  If so, it seems like the Pac-12 might have some problems down the road.