10 Things In Sports That Are Stupid

John Rich2/13/2025 3:40 PM

Yesterday I came across that video of a man who may or may not have hit a hole-in-one, depending on how much you get off on citing obscure golf rules that defy common sense and reason. Thankfully, I think the golf world has made tremendous progress in thwarting the belief that what makes golf great is the relentless enforcing of technicalities, and shoving outdated etiquette down everyone's throats so that the game can be as unwelcoming as humanly possible. There are still plenty of people out there who will watch that video and cum their pants at the prospect of citing rule B-76-2 to not only steal joy from a fellow golfer, but to actively shame him for ever for a second thinking he may have accomplished something cool. But credit to golf, a majority of people in the replies on that post are normal human beings who simply congratulated the man on his hole-in-one. #GoodForGolf

However, there is one specific unwritten (or maybe it's written somewhere) rule/tradition in golf which in my opinion is the most nonsensical of them all. A tradition that I'm pretty sure people are still expected to abide by to this day. At least in some circles. When a golfer hits a hole-in-one, he's expected to buy drinks for the entire clubhouse.

People were besides themselves with anger that Riggs counted this as a hole-in-one at all. Which I understand to an extent. There's just something about the way he takes the club back that inclines you to hurl insults at him. But that's aside the point. Riggs claimed hole-in-one, therefore was obligated to buy drinks for the entire clubhouse at Bandon Dunes. I'm not crying for Riggs over that. He seems to be in an OK place financially. But how could that have ever become a tradition? That you can do something good, and be rewarded with an enormous bill. That's the opposite of how it should be. You just had a once-in-a-lifetime achievement. If anybody should be getting free drinks it's you.

I know most people who hit hole-in-one's aren't pressured to follow through with this. But there was a time that rule nearly fucked my dad over in a pretty significant way. He was teaching a semester at a university in China, and somehow got hooked up with a round of golf at this state-of-the-art, crazy expensive club. Somewhere he never would have paid out of pocket to play. It was a whole to-do. He had a caddy and everything. Anyways, he hit a shot on a par 3 that ended up about a half-inch from the hole. He goes on to learn from his caddy that had he hit a hole-in-one, he wouldn't have been expected to buy everyone a round of drinks. He essentially would have been expected to throw an all-night long party at the country club. I think buying people gifts was expected. Crazy stuff. We're talking tens of thousands of dollars worth of damage. It may have even been a hundred thousand. Apparently that's how they do things at this ritzy Chinese country club. Now I'm assuming he would have found a way out of it, even if it meant he had to dip out the side door. But considering he's a guest at this prestigious club in an extremely foreign country, everyone else on that course were supposed millionaires, he's halfway relying on the hospitality of the people who got him on the course. As I understand it, people in China take being disrespected pretty seriously. I mean that could have been a pretty fucked up situation. All because he nearly played golf too well. That's such backwards rule.

Here are other traditions and rules in sports that are stupid.

Unwritten Rules of Baseball

In particular, there are two unwritten rules of baseball that are truly absurd. The first is, "You Can't Bunt to Break-Up a No-Hitter". If a starting pitcher makes it deep enough into the game without letting up a hit, the offense is expected to take it easy on him. They're no longer allowed to try their hardest. They have to bat at a handicap for the rest of the game to give the pitcher a better chance at a milestone. People will claim it's not about that, but that's what's happening. There shouldn't be any way to get on base that is considered "cheap". A no hitter/perfect game is a team feat, and if your defense is asleep at the wheel, that's their fault. I can sort of understand it in a blowout. But even in a blowout, players should be allowed to try. The batters are trying to keep their jobs. They need to hit a certain average to keep their jobs. If there is a fast player who's good at bunting, it's insane to tell him he's not allowed to use his strengths to get on base. There's even people out there who will get mad at a player bunting during a no-hitter in a 1 run game. They think the defense should be able to play back, and just not worry about bunts at all. I hate it.

Piggybacking off that, there's another unwritten rule that's even crazier. It's straight up dangerous. In some baseball fans minds, if a player bunts to break up a no-hitter in the top of the 7th, when that player comes back to the plate in the 9th, it's perfectly acceptable for the pitcher to throw a baseball 100 mph at his head. They are also entitled to do so with any player who celebrates a home run too aggressively. I think we've dialed back on that one a bit. Now it's more like 95 mph at the batters back. But for the longest time, if a batter so much as took an extra half second to admire his 500-foot moon shot, it was well within the pitcher's right to attempt murder the next time he came to the plate. That is not a punishment fitting of the crime. That's not an eye-for-an-eye. This would not be a reasonable reaction to someone pimping a home run.

Baseball Managers Wearing Full Uniforms

KEVIN M COX. Shutterstock Images.

Sticking with baseball, it's very silly how 70+ year old men who are barely athletic enough to tie their shoes have to dress like they're about to come off the bench to pinch hit. Let Dusty Baker dress like an adult.

Tennis Players Apologizing For Good Shots

Every time a tennis player hit's a perfect shot that tips the top of the net, trickles over, and lands right at the base of the net on the opponents side (i.e. the best tennis shot you could possibly hit), the player who scored the point will raise his hand as if to apologize to his opponents for merely getting lucky. I think that's dumb. You hit the perfect tennis shot, at the best possible trajectory to still get your shot over the net. I get that it wasn't necessarily intentional, but shouldn't have to pretend to feel bad about it.

Sideline Reporters in Football

Specifically when it comes to interviewing head coaches as they run off the field for halftime. Maybe they're helpful when it comes to reporting on injuries? Maybe? But with all due respect to Kayce Smith, and all the brave beautiful women who grace our sidelines and bless us with reports, they hit at a no greater than 1.5% clip when it comes to getting anything of substance out of a football coach as he runs off the field and reluctantly stops to fulfill his obligation. It's comical, really.

"Coach, your offense moved the ball great, but turnovers have kept the other team in the game. What's the message to your guys at halftime?

"We just gotta keep moving the ball the way we are, and find a way to limit the turnovers. If we can do that, we'll be fine."

"Thanks coach."

"Thanks."

Automatic First Downs

Moving on the "dumb sports rules" portion of this blog. There are a ton of football penalties I could point at and poke holes in. Like rewarding terribly under thrown passes with pass interference because the receiver has to stop on a dime to come back of the football, and there's no possible way a defensive back could stop in time to avoid contact. Questionable pass interference calls downfield in the NFL that result in a 40 yard penalties are ridiculous. Patrick Mahomes pretending to go out of bounds and getting extra yards out of it because QB's are overly protected. In general, the fact that there aren't more varying levels of personal foul/unsportsmanlike conduct penalties is dumb. There should be a difference between crushing a QB a full second after the throw, and grazing his ear hole with your thumb on a follow through.

But more than anything, there's one thing in particular I never hear anybody talk about, but always drives me crazy. They shouldn't give automatic first downs on all 15-yard penalties. The exact same penalty should not hurt a defense worse depending on what the down and distance is. If the defense has an offense pinned back in a 3rd & 25, and they get a late hit along the sidelines right at the line of scrimmage, the offense should only get 15 yards, resulting in a 3rd & 10. It's bullshit that a personal foul on a 3rd & 40 huts a team so much worse than a 15-yard penalty on a 2rd & 5. It effectively punishes the perfectly fair & legal plays a defense made leading up to the penalty by rewarding the offense a fresh set of downs. To me, that's not right. If 15 yards puts the offense past the first down marker, then give it them. But 15 yards is a harsh enough penalty in its own right

Shooting Fouls in Basketball

I don't watch a ton of basketball. I don't necessarily know the intricacies of the sport. But when a shooter pump fakes a defender off his feet, the defender goes flying through the air in a direction away from the shooter, but on the shot the shooter leaps 3-feet to the side and contorts his body in the most theatrical way possible, a way he would never shoot a basketball if he wasn't initiating contact… it seems like basic common sense to not reward the shooter for that. People's response to that complaint is always, "Well don't leave your feet then…"

But if you leave you feet in a direction in which you won't make contact with the shooter unless the shooter goes completely out of his way to make the contact happen… that shouldn't be a foul. Fundamentally, that should not be how basketball is played. It slows down the game, and it stinks out loud. I think the NBA technically has a rule against it now, but the refs continue to call it, so you can't fault the shooters. They would be stupid to not take advantage. I find it bananas how the world of basketball has grown to accept it as part of the game. It's like people are too close to see how ridiculous it is. But if you take a step back and look at that play objectively, it's so obvious to me the defender should not be penalized.

Charging get a little ridiculous as well, but I can't live with that. It doesn't look right. It also slows down the game to an annoying extent. But if a defender gets to a spot on the floor first, he should have a right to that space. Charging doesn't upset me nearly as much as the wild limb flailing three-pointer where the offensive player is legitimately going out of his way to get hit.

Shootouts (Hockey & Soccer)

Penalty shots in both hockey and soccer are a delightful part of the game, and perfectly fair penalties to award during the course of play. Deciding a game with them does not make sense. When it comes to actually resembling the way a game is played, a shootout makes more sense in hockey than soccer. Breakaways happen frequently during games. It's a fair fight between goalie and shooter. But overtime is already stripped down to 3-on-3. 3-on-3 hockey will only go on for so long until someone scores. No players are being endangered by playing out 3-on-3 OT until a goal is scored.

Penalties make more sense in soccer from the standpoint of, if you don't do something the game is liable to go on for hours. But the penalty shot itself is such a crap shoot. There's so much luck involved. Soccer just needs to bite the bullet and accept that every once in a while, a game might last six hours. Games where penalties shots are even possible are so few and far between anyways. I'm pretty sure they only happen in knockout round games of international tournaments. Honestly, one of those games going six hours every now and then would rule. Just allow the teams to make some more substitutions, or take a page out of hockey's book and cut down the number of players on the field. Or remove goalies from the equation entirely. That could be interesting. But the fact that the World Cup final can be decided by penalty kicks is nuts.

Fans Singing Sweet Caroline

There are infinitely too many teams who claim Sweet Caroline as their song. I don't know who sang first. I'm guessing when the Boston Red Sox starting using the song it was fairly original for a sports team. They seem to be the oldest franchise who claims it. But I went to Bowling Green State University, and we always played the song between the 2nd and 3rd periods of hockey games. I specifically remember overhearing a conversation about how another school stole "Sweet Caroline" from us. I thought it was such a preposterous thing for Bowling Green Falcon hockey fans to claim Sweet Caroline, and it left such a bad taste in my mouth that now every time I hear fans sing the song in unison I imagine they too probably think it's "their song". My point is… be more original teams. If Michigan can make Mr. Brightside into a thing, then you can come up with something different than Sweet Caroline

Dabo Swinney Sprinting Out of The Tunnel

Biggest look at me guy in sports. Someday I hope a player decides to outrun him.

BONUS - Something People Think is Dumb But Is Actually Good: Clock Counting Up in Soccer

On the surface, a clock counting upwards to 90 minutes, followed by 'x' amount of stoppage time, and nobody knowing exactly when the game will end seems unnecessarily complicated. But I like how it allows games to end on an offensive rush. It's not as if switching to a regular downward counting clock would result in a bunch of exciting soccer buzzer beaters (if any at all). With an upwards counting clock, when they reach the end of stoppage time, a team will gain possession of the ball and know they have exactly one more rush to make something happen. They can draw something up, and put forth a legitimate effort one last time, instead of rushing a shot on goal from deep that would never have a chance of going in.

My apologies, that went on way longer than I expected. I could keep going too. Credit to me for not bringing up teams visiting the White House after winning the championship, because people have ruined it to the point that it has to be turned into political statement one way or another every fucking time. Or bringing up when teams weaponize God. Like when a player says he wasn't worried about that last second kick going through the uprights because he knew God had them. Does God just hate the other team then? Are you saying you're a better Christian than I am? What the heck man. Ok sorry I have to stop somewhere. Thank you for letting me vent.

football + 12 Tags

John Rich2/13/2025 3:40 PM