1593: "Play by Play"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
higgs-boson
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:00 pm UTC
Location: Europe (UTC + 4 newpix)

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby higgs-boson » Thu Oct 22, 2015 5:19 am UTC

Angua wrote:
HES wrote:
Angua wrote:This reminds me of that reporter who live blogged a football press conference without knowing German.

I presume said conference was in German?

Yes.

Sadly I can't remember enough to find it. Someone posted it in the Other news thread.

Jürgen Klopp, (at this time) famous coach of the German soccer club BVB, resigned. About half a year ago.
(see here)
Apostolic Visitator, Holiest of Holy Fun-Havers
You have questions about XKCD: "Time"? There's a whole Wiki dedicated to it!

User avatar
tomandlu
Posts: 1073
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:22 am UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby tomandlu » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:25 am UTC

What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

Not so much a rule, more of a naming thing, but penalties in rugby always throw me, as they seem to be part of the game rather than a punishment for bad behaviour.
How can I think my way out of the problem when the problem is the way I think?

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Coyne » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:43 am UTC

At last the truth is revealed: baseball is a pillow fight. The Canvas Bag Conspiracy must be furious.
In all fairness...

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby orthogon » Thu Oct 22, 2015 8:38 am UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

Not so much a rule, more of a naming thing, but penalties in rugby always throw me, as they seem to be part of the game rather than a punishment for bad behaviour.

They're not as serious a sanction as in football, for at least three reasons: they're not as likely to be converted into points, since they are taken from the site of the infringement, which can be anywhere on the pitch (though at the first-class level, anywhere in the opponent's half is kickable these days); if kicked at goal the result is worth less than half a converted try; and rugby matches are generally higher scoring, even allowing for the scoring system. But it depends a lot on the context. In a close match, in the last five minutes, in your own half, you don't want to concede a penalty, as Scotland fans will confirm. In Sunday's match, Australia's penalty took them from 2 points behind to one point ahead, so it was worse than a penalty in football would have been. That's another of the interesting features of the scoring system: you can go from losing to winning in a single score, without being tied.

All the same, penalties are intended to be a sanction, giving the other side more advantage than they would have gained had the infringement not been committed. Rugby is more about attrition, and conceding a penalty is just one reversal in the 80 minutes of ebb and flow. It may be a calculated risk: you might give away 3 to avoid a possible 7; and the rules are more complex and open to interpretation, so you might give one away by mistake or by, say, holding on just a bit too long for the ref's liking. And finally, particularly in scrums and breakdowns, you hear a lot about a team "forcing a penalty", i.e. making it unavoidable by superior speed, power or skill.

I think the English word penalty is perfectly appropriate; it's only confusing in the context of the similarly named sanction in association football, which amounts to a 90% chance of a score that would be the decider in 50% of matches.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby CharlieP » Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:14 am UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

Not so much a rule, more of a naming thing, but penalties in rugby always throw me, as they seem to be part of the game rather than a punishment for bad behaviour.


They're both. The different levies may seem arbitrary and baffling, but the very basic logic is that scrums are awarded for mistakes (knock-ons, forward passes, accidental offside), penalties are awarded for deliberate infringements (offside, deliberate knock-on, throwing ball into touch, foul play), and free kicks are awarded for technical errors at set pieces (not straight feed at a scrum or lineout, too many at a lineout), or for a clean catch.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
higgs-boson
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:00 pm UTC
Location: Europe (UTC + 4 newpix)

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby higgs-boson » Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:27 am UTC

Does not meet requirements for a thing-explainer thing.
  • bat
  • shelves (shelf)
  • wow
  • rude
  • teammates (teammate)
  • pillow
  • rules (rule)
  • yikes
  • hopefully (hopeful)

This lifts my spirits: In such a world full of rules*, the literal actual word is not in the top 1000.
On the other hand, "law" is.

*Why can we deprecate API functions easily but fail to dump next-to-last century's nonsensical laws and regulations?! It's like enhancing yesterday's .view(void) method with ten mandatory and sixty optional arguments, seven intentional (and two hundred eighty-one non-intentional) side-effects and customizations for sixteen different compilers.
Apostolic Visitator, Holiest of Holy Fun-Havers
You have questions about XKCD: "Time"? There's a whole Wiki dedicated to it!

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby orthogon » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:33 am UTC

higgs-boson wrote:Does not meet requirements for a thing-explainer thing.
    ...
  • wow
    ...

Interesting; wow is definitely one of the ten most common words in doge.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Oct 22, 2015 12:37 pm UTC

Tova wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
toddgeorge wrote:
Cervisiae Amatorem wrote:I think the "I don't know even the most basic rules of the most popular sport in my country" bit is a little played out.


Agreed. It reminds me of the people who think it's funny to tweet/FB post something to the effect of "Oh, is there some sort of sportsball match being played today??" during the Super Bowl. Yeah, yeah, we get it - you're not a sports fan. Whatever.
Except, White Beret Guy isn't a stand-in for Randall, and as previously linked, Randall himself seems to get annoyed at the "sportsball" dismissal of sporting events by geeks who take pride in being ignorant about them.

This is only an "I'm not into sports" bit to the extent that Up Goer Five was an "I'm not into space" bit.


It's still an "I'm not into sports" joke, whether the character is a stand-in for Randall or not.


Only if you consider previous beret-guy strips as "I'm not into X" jokes. For example: http://www.xkcd.com/1322/

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby orthogon » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:16 pm UTC

higgs-boson wrote:*Why can we deprecate API functions easily but fail to dump next-to-last century's nonsensical laws and regulations?! It's like enhancing yesterday's .view(void) method with ten mandatory and sixty optional arguments, seven intentional (and two hundred eighty-one non-intentional) side-effects and customizations for sixteen different compilers.

1. Because we want people born and educated in the past to continue to be able to operate in society, whereas in API "design" the idea of backward compatibility went out with the CRT monitor, and
2. Some of the things we thought up in the past were actually quite good, and making sure we don't throw them away without careful consideration of seen as a good thing. Conversely, in the world of APIs, novelty is king, and removing useful features is seen as somewhere between mere collateral damage and actively desirable.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

Zylon
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Zylon » Thu Oct 22, 2015 8:56 pm UTC

cryptoengineer wrote:It's interesting to compare this with Munro's take on Superbowl:
https://xkcd.com/1480/

Ah yes, one his increasingly many "I hold my own readers in contempt" strips.

Tova
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:44 am UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Tova » Fri Oct 23, 2015 12:23 am UTC

rmsgrey wrote:
Tova wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
toddgeorge wrote:
Cervisiae Amatorem wrote:I think the "I don't know even the most basic rules of the most popular sport in my country" bit is a little played out.


Agreed. It reminds me of the people who think it's funny to tweet/FB post something to the effect of "Oh, is there some sort of sportsball match being played today??" during the Super Bowl. Yeah, yeah, we get it - you're not a sports fan. Whatever.
Except, White Beret Guy isn't a stand-in for Randall, and as previously linked, Randall himself seems to get annoyed at the "sportsball" dismissal of sporting events by geeks who take pride in being ignorant about them.

This is only an "I'm not into sports" bit to the extent that Up Goer Five was an "I'm not into space" bit.


It's still an "I'm not into sports" joke, whether the character is a stand-in for Randall or not.


Only if you consider previous beret-guy strips as "I'm not into X" jokes. For example: http://www.xkcd.com/1322/


Maybe you're right, and I misidentified the joke that he's done again.

Mikeski
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Mikeski » Fri Oct 23, 2015 12:42 am UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

The corner cases--where every official on the field gets together and, between them all, none knows the rule to adjudicate what just happened--would certainly be the "weirdest", but I'd only "know of" those after the fact (and probably 15 minutes of discussion on SportsCenter.)

I find the arbitrary rules weird.

Offsides, for example. In hockey, it's a line on the ice. In (American) football, it's where the ball is at the start of each play. Baseball, stay on the basepaths. In (everywhere-else) football, it's... where the other team is standing at that moment?

Or ground-rule doubles in baseball. The rules of a professional sport change depending on which ballpark they're playing in?

User avatar
duckshirt
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 am UTC
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby duckshirt » Fri Oct 23, 2015 1:47 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:Or ground-rule doubles in baseball. The rules of a professional sport change depending on which ballpark they're playing in?

That's the best part about baseball in my opinion. Who wants to play on the same field every time?

Ground-rule doubles are pretty much the same everywhere but there but ballparks do have a handful of their own ground rules (example).
lol everything matters
-Ed

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Carlington » Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:18 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:
tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

...
I find the arbitrary rules weird.

Offsides, for example.
...
In (everywhere-else) football, it's... where the other team is standing at that moment?
...

In association football (the one with the round ball that stays on the ground, the rule is that the ball can't be passed to any player who is closer to the opponent's goal than the opponent's last defender (save the goalkeeper). Thus, being between your opponent's last defender and the goalkeeper is offside
In rugby football, when a player is tackled, opposing players cannot come within ten metres of the tackled player until the ball is back in play.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

RogueCynic
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby RogueCynic » Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:06 am UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

Not so much a rule, more of a naming thing, but penalties in rugby always throw me, as they seem to be part of the game rather than a punishment for bad behaviour.
As to the strangest rule part, I'm not sure this one is true. One American baseball team put a 3 1/2 foot tall batter in. His strike zone was so low he could only be walked. The league responded with a height requirement for all players.
I am Lord Titanius Englesmith, Fancyman of Cornwood.
See 1 Kings 7:23 for pi.
If you put a prune in a juicer, what would you get?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26350
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:08 am UTC

Zylon wrote:
cryptoengineer wrote:It's interesting to compare this with Munro's take on Superbowl:
https://xkcd.com/1480/

Ah yes, one his increasingly many "I hold my own readers in contempt" strips.

Only those readers who think it's clever to be disdainfully ignorant about things they don't like.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby ahammel » Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:50 am UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

In baseball it is against the rules for a fielder to cause a fair ball to cross the foul line by blowing on it.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
higgs-boson
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:00 pm UTC
Location: Europe (UTC + 4 newpix)

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby higgs-boson » Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:05 am UTC

orthogon wrote:
higgs-boson wrote:*Why can we deprecate API functions easily but fail to dump next-to-last century's nonsensical laws and regulations?! It's like enhancing yesterday's .view(void) method with ten mandatory and sixty optional arguments, seven intentional (and two hundred eighty-one non-intentional) side-effects and customizations for sixteen different compilers.

1. Because we want people born and educated in the past to continue to be able to operate in society, whereas in API "design" the idea of backward compatibility went out with the CRT monitor, and

Ah, wait. Good intentions, yes. But the outcome?

For example, all guys who really know and understand my country's tax law are professionals, but everyone living in marriage or freelance or <some more reasons> have to sign their annual tax declaration and take the responsibility for any mistakes they unwittingly make. It is like playing games with God without knowing the rules. Or take the Criminal Law's articles about matters related to sexual interactions into consideration: They are complicated enough to cause ugly discussions even among people who focused their professional life on studying this very clauses. That's a law that has to bother everyone (literally) by nature and yet one just cannot be sure to draw the line between OK and NOT OK in the right place.

It is like accepting every bloody change request coming in by even the most stupid or ill-meaning stake holder you ever had. You'll get something even your best developers fail to understand anymore, and at some point in the not too far away future no-one wants to pay the expenses for operations and maintenance. You just have to replace your product with a newly built. Unfortunately, regarding state (or international) law this does not seem to be a peaceful option.

orthogon wrote:2. Some of the things we thought up in the past were actually quite good, and making sure we don't throw them away without careful consideration of seen as a good thing. Conversely, in the world of APIs, novelty is king, and removing useful features is seen as somewhere between mere collateral damage and actively desirable.

Agreed, but I would not ask to change the law (or an API) without careful consideration. I suppose that those people who do usually follow more or less selfish reasons. Going from "let's update or API so <other company>s software looks old and ugly and isn't compatible, anymore" to "look, a young guy shot twenty other pupils, now let's prohibit first person shooters, because that is the easiest thing to do and everyone will think we did something about the problem (which we didn't but who cares? They won't notice it until past next election day) and the gun clubs stay happy".

Having said all this, in my country it did not come into vogue yet for innocent (but poor) people to plead guilty because they cannot afford justice being served. But we are getting closer day by day.

Mh, this got a bit off-topic, here.
Apostolic Visitator, Holiest of Holy Fun-Havers
You have questions about XKCD: "Time"? There's a whole Wiki dedicated to it!

GuesssWho
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:29 am UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby GuesssWho » Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:13 am UTC

. . . somehow I have managed to know too little about baseball to really find this comic funny. He's just describing perfectly normal events like they're cool, right?

Mikeski
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Mikeski » Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:20 am UTC

GuesssWho wrote:. . . somehow I have managed to know too little about baseball to really find this comic funny. He's just describing perfectly normal events like they're cool, right?

He's doing this, backwards, as a baseball announcer.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby rmsgrey » Fri Oct 23, 2015 11:42 am UTC

higgs-boson wrote:Or take the Criminal Law's articles about matters related to sexual interactions into consideration: They are complicated enough to cause ugly discussions even among people who focused their professional life on studying this very clauses. That's a law that has to bother everyone (literally) by nature and yet one just cannot be sure to draw the line between OK and NOT OK in the right place.


If the laws are properly framed, then most people should be staying well clear of the legal/illegal line anyway - if you're 40 and trying to seduce a teenager, that's socially unacceptable (for the most part) whether they're 15 or 19 - but the law generally draws a line somewhere in that range between "legal (but still creepy)" and "illegal". It's the job of the law to determine how creepy is too creepy, while individuals should generally try to avoid being creepy at all even if it happens to be legal...

User avatar
Eshru
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:51 am UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Eshru » Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:40 pm UTC

RogueCynic wrote:Thank you Jackpot777. I know enough about sports to mix the rules. One question I ask during American football games is "Why don't they call traveling?". As to the"Back to the Future" reference, the Halloween comet is going to crush the earth to fix the paradox of the Cubs not winning the series. Thank you Chicago.

Blame Miami first for not even making the playoffs.

Cervisiae Amatorem
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:47 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Cervisiae Amatorem » Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:43 pm UTC

Tova wrote:
rmsgrey wrote:
Tova wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
toddgeorge wrote:
Cervisiae Amatorem wrote:I think the "I don't know even the most basic rules of the most popular sport in my country" bit is a little played out.


Agreed. It reminds me of the people who think it's funny to tweet/FB post something to the effect of "Oh, is there some sort of sportsball match being played today??" during the Super Bowl. Yeah, yeah, we get it - you're not a sports fan. Whatever.
Except, White Beret Guy isn't a stand-in for Randall, and as previously linked, Randall himself seems to get annoyed at the "sportsball" dismissal of sporting events by geeks who take pride in being ignorant about them.

This is only an "I'm not into sports" bit to the extent that Up Goer Five was an "I'm not into space" bit.


It's still an "I'm not into sports" joke, whether the character is a stand-in for Randall or not.


Only if you consider previous beret-guy strips as "I'm not into X" jokes. For example: http://www.xkcd.com/1322/


Maybe you're right, and I misidentified the joke that he's done again.


I don't think so. Each of the panels shows a distinct non-understanding of the rules of the game, just an outsiders explanation of what is currently happening mixed with mild surprise. The comic 1322 about winter coming and using the wrong words for gloves and birds and trees was amusing because of the profound statement at the end.

Frankly this comic reads like Sheldon from TBBT describing a game over the phone to Leonard, after Leonard accidentally bet $10,000 instead of $10 when he was trying to impress Penny in front of a bookie by saying "Put a dime on the Phillies".

Randall is not so meta to make the joke of the comic "haha this is what normal people think nerds think baseball is like".

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4584
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Oct 23, 2015 9:14 pm UTC

But is he so meta even this acronym…?
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby CharlieP » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:31 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:In rugby football, when a player is tackled, opposing players cannot come within ten metres of the tackled player until the ball is back in play.


Say what now?

When a player is tackled, if he/she stays on his feet, opposing players can try and rip the ball from his/her grasp (known as a maul). If he goes to ground, he/she must release the ball, while the tackler must release him/her, and opposing players can immediately pick up the ball if none of the players' team have reached the breakdown, otherwise they are allowed to try and drive them backwards off the ball (known as a ruck).

Offside describes a number of different offences, but all to do with being where you're not supposed to be (in front of somebody on your team when he/she kicks the ball, closer than 5 metres behind a scrum or 10 metres behind a lineout still in progress etc.).

PS I've just realised you may be thinking of rugby league.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
colonel_hack
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:50 am UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby colonel_hack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:39 am UTC

What it was, was football.

Andy Griffith.

User avatar
Keyman
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Re: 1593: "Play by Play"

Postby Keyman » Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:15 pm UTC

tomandlu wrote:What's the weirdest actual rule in a sport that you know of?

Baseball's "Infield Fly Rule" -
An INFIELD FLY is a fair fly ball (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or first, second and third bases are occupied, before two are out. The pitcher, catcher and any outfielder who stations himself in the infield on the play shall be considered infielders for the purpose of this rule.

When it seems apparent that a batted ball will be an Infield Fly, the umpire shall immediately declare “Infield Fly” for the benefit of the runners. If the ball is near the baselines, the umpire shall declare “Infield Fly, if Fair.”

The ball is alive and runners may advance at the risk of the ball being caught, or retouch and advance after the ball is touched, the same as on any fly ball. If the hit becomes a foul ball, it is treated the same as any foul.

If a declared Infield Fly is allowed to fall untouched to the ground, and bounces foul before passing first or third base, it is a foul ball. If a declared Infield Fly falls untouched to the ground outside the baseline, and bounces fair before passing first or third base, it is an Infield Fly.

The weirdest thing about it is the actual definition as quoted never mentions the batter who hit the 'infield fly' is called out.
A childhood spent walking while reading books has prepared me unexpectedly well for today's world.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Raidri and 27 guests