Engimal v3
**** m**nl*nd*rs
Apply the rules as rigidly as possible. If everyone is up in arms about something, that particular rule is probably s**t and needs to be changed.
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 8 Winner: bearweger
Philosophically: Consistency vs Common Sense
- Thread starter Rance2Mewtwo
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Rance2Mewtwo
Cancelled
- Jul 31, 2016
- 1,554
- 4,909
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #27
The problem with that is you can't change the rule until a year after a ridiculous outcome is enforced against everybody's better judgment.
You can't predict and outlaw every single possible outcome in advance, so you need flexibility to prevent farcical outcomes.
Rules shouldn't be open to interpretation and what individuals think might be common sense. Rules are rules and need to be followed strictly otherwise there is no point having them. If you dont think something is correct then change the rules
Rance2Mewtwo
Cancelled
- Jul 31, 2016
- 1,554
- 4,909
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #29
99% of the time this is the case and you resume on auto-pilot with the rules dictating what happens.
However, in the 1% of the time where a situation produces a ridiculous outcome (not foreseen by the original rule), then I think the AFL should have the power to come over the top and apply better judgment.
That's different to saying rules are open to interpretation - 99% of the time they're not. It's just a focus on applying common sense to outlier situations.
Whether they admit it publicly or not this is what the AFL does.
