1552: Rulebook - Revision history

TheusafBOT: Reverted edit 352427 by I love you kynde to 314805

2024-10-09T17:08:43Z

Reverted edit 352427 by I love you kynde to 314805

I love you kynde: i love you kynde

2024-10-09T17:08:34Z

i love you kynde

Tromag at 19:50, 2 June 2023

2023-06-02T19:50:20Z

172.70.90.227: Undo revision 284762 by 162.158.107.52 (talk) Vandal can't even get a link to work...

2022-05-31T18:51:22Z

Undo revision 284762 by 162.158.107.52 (talk) Vandal can't even get a link to work...

162.158.107.52 at 16:57, 31 May 2022

2022-05-31T16:57:45Z

Theusaf: Reverted edits by Donald Trump (talk) to last revision by CRLF

2022-05-26T20:01:15Z

Reverted edits by Donald Trump (talk) to last revision by CRLF

Show changes

Donald Trump: Reverted edit by anti-crap user

2022-05-26T18:56:42Z

Reverted edit by anti-crap user

Show changes

CRLF: Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

2022-05-26T18:04:20Z

Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

Show changes

Donald Trump: Crapped page

2022-05-26T16:58:31Z

Crapped page

Show changes

Jacky720: Reverted edits by Xray Kilo Charlie Delta (talk) to last revision by Davidy22

2022-05-23T18:44:57Z

Reverted edits by Xray Kilo Charlie Delta (talk) to last revision by Davidy22

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 9 October 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~i love you kynde~~	+	{{comic
		+	\| number = 1552
		+	\| date = July 17, 2015
		+	\| title = Rulebook
		+	\| image = rulebook.png
		+	\| titletext = It's definitely an intentional foul, but we've decided it's worth it.
		+	}}
		+
		+	==Explanation==
		+	This comic is a direct reference to the 1997 film ''{{w\|Air Bud}}''. In the film, a {{w\|golden retriever}} becomes the star player on a {{w\|basketball}} team. The obvious objection to an animal playing on human team is raised, but is handwaved by the referee responding "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball."
		+
		+	In organized sports, the rulebook is generally considered to be the final arbiter of decisions, but the interpretation that anything not explicitly considered in the rulebook is allowed is shaky at best. It's impossible for a rulebook to detail every possible scenario that someone could attempt, and certain basic assumptions about gameplay need to be made. [[Ponytail]] highlights this by pointing out that there's also not an explicit rule against killing and eating an opposing player. With human players, this would be covered by laws against murder and cannibalism, but dogs don't enjoy the same level of legal protection (there may be animal cruelty laws, but those are likely to be far less punitive).
		+
		+	The title text does acknowledge that killing and eating an opposing player is likely covered under the rules concerning {{w\|technical foul\|fouls}}, but the benefit of committing the foul (the star player being dead) would be worth the resulting penalty (giving the other team a couple of free throws). This likely pokes fun at the common practice of intentional fouls. It's not uncommon for players to commit fouls intentionally, having calculated that they'll gain some advantage (such as breaking the momentum of a play) which is worth the penalties they'll incur.
		+
		+	Randall previously parodied the "animal-as-player" loophole in [[115: Meerkat]]. Rule books are also mentioned in [[330: Indecision]], [[393: Ultimate Game]], and [[1593: Play-By-Play]].
		+
		+	==Transcript==
		+	:[Cueball and Megan are standing with a dog wearing jersey number 9, Ponytail and Hairy are facing them holding a rulebook. The horizon is visible behind them.]
		+	:Ponytail: There's nothing in the rulebook that says we can't kill and eat your dog.
		+
		+	{{comic discussion}}
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
		+	[[Category:Animals]]
		+	[[Category:Dogs]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 9 October 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~{{comic~~	+	i love you kynde
−	~~\| number = 1552~~
−	~~\| date = July 17, 2015~~
−	~~\| title = Rulebook~~
−	~~\| image = rulebook.png~~
−	~~\| titletext = It's definitely an intentional foul, but we've decided it's worth it.~~
−	}}
−
−	~~==Explanation==~~
−	This comic is a direct reference to the 1997 film ''{{w\|Air Bud}}''. In the film, a {{w\|golden retriever}} becomes the star player on a {{w\|basketball}} team. The obvious objection to an animal playing on human team is raised, but is handwaved by the referee responding "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball."
−
−	In organized sports, the rulebook is generally considered to be the final arbiter of decisions, but the interpretation that anything not explicitly considered in the rulebook is allowed is shaky at best. It's impossible for a rulebook to detail every possible scenario that someone could attempt, and certain basic assumptions about gameplay need to be made. [[Ponytail]] highlights this by pointing out that there's also not an explicit rule against killing and eating an opposing player. With human players, this would be covered by laws against murder and cannibalism, but dogs don't enjoy the same level of legal protection (there may be animal cruelty laws, but those are likely to be far less punitive).
−
−	The title text does acknowledge that killing and eating an opposing player is likely covered under the rules concerning {{w\|technical foul\|fouls}}, but the benefit of committing the foul (the star player being dead) would be worth the resulting penalty (giving the other team a couple of free throws). This likely pokes fun at the common practice of intentional fouls. It's not uncommon for players to commit fouls intentionally, having calculated that they'll gain some advantage (such as breaking the momentum of a play) which is worth the penalties they'll incur.
−
−	~~Randall previously parodied the "animal-as-player" loophole in [[115: Meerkat]]. Rule books are also mentioned in [[330: Indecision]], [[393: Ultimate Game]], and [[1593: Play-By-Play]].~~
−
−	~~==Transcript==~~
−	~~:[Cueball and Megan are standing with a dog wearing jersey number 9, Ponytail and Hairy are facing them holding a rulebook. The horizon is visible behind them.]~~
−	~~:Ponytail: There's nothing in the rulebook that says we can't kill and eat your dog.~~
−
−	~~{{comic discussion}}~~
−	~~[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Animals]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Dogs]]~~

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ==Explanation==
-This comic is a direct reference to the film ''{{w|Air Bud}}''. In the film, a {{w|golden retriever}} becomes the star player on a {{w|basketball}} team.  The opposing team contests the legality of having a dog as a player, but the referee, having reviewed the rulebook, responds "Ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball." Here, {{tvtropes|RulesLawyer|the opposing team turns the rulebook loophole against the first team}}. Because rulebooks are considered the final arbiter of decisions in most sports, [[Ponytail]] suggests that, since it isn't explicitly prohibited, her team is allowed to kill and eat the dog. Randall is using this logical fallacy to highlight the absurdity of the plot of ''Air Bud'' and other similar movies in which ordinary animals take on human roles. At the same time, Randall has created an absurd and anticlimactic premise for such a movie, and he may be making a more general commentary on {{w|Hollywood}}'s habit of making movies by combining basic tropes that, by themselves, tend to do well in the box office.
+This comic is a direct reference to the 1997 film ''{{w|Air Bud}}''. In the film, a {{w|golden retriever}} becomes the star player on a {{w|basketball}} team. The obvious objection to an animal playing on human team is raised, but is handwaved by the referee responding "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball."
-The title text acknowledges that killing and eating the dog would result in a {{w|technical foul|foul}} (interfering inappropriately with other players), but the benefit of committing the foul (the star player being dead and out of the game) would be worth the resulting penalty (giving the other team a couple of free throws). This of course ignores any local laws that could cover the proposed killing, such as animal cruelty laws. Randall is poking fun at the common practice of intentional fouls, something that happens particularly often in basketball. Although a foul is by definition against the rules, a team may deliberately break those rules and accept the penalty in order to gain some perceived advantage. For example, in association football (soccer), a player may intentionally foul an opposing player with a strong attack to allow his team to regroup and increase its defensive position, starting with blocking the resulting free kick. In basketball, an intentional foul can stop the clock and turn over the ball, or may simply give the team time to rest and/or discuss strategy that it otherwise may not have had.
+In organized sports, the rulebook is generally considered to be the final arbiter of decisions, but the interpretation that anything not explicitly considered in the rulebook is allowed is shaky at best. It's impossible for a rulebook to detail every possible scenario that someone could attempt, and certain basic assumptions about gameplay need to be made. [[Ponytail]] highlights this by pointing out that there's also not an explicit rule against killing and eating an opposing player. With human players, this would be covered by laws against murder and cannibalism, but dogs don't enjoy the same level of legal protection (there may be animal cruelty laws, but those are likely to be far less punitive).
-The dog in the comic is wearing a jersey with the number 9. In ''Air Bud'', the dog wore a jersey with "K" on one side and "9" on the other, forming "K-9", a popular shortening of the word "canine".
+The title text  does acknowledge that killing and eating an opposing player is likely covered under the rules concerning {{w|technical foul|fouls}}, but the benefit of committing the foul (the star player being dead) would be worth the resulting penalty (giving the other team a couple of free throws). This likely pokes fun at the common practice of intentional fouls. It's not uncommon for players to commit fouls intentionally, having calculated that they'll gain some advantage (such as breaking the momentum of a play) which is worth the penalties they'll incur.
 Randall previously parodied the "animal-as-player" loophole in [[115: Meerkat]]. Rule books are also mentioned in [[330: Indecision]], [[393: Ultimate Game]], and [[1593: Play-By-Play]].

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 | date      = July 17, 2015
 | title     = Rulebook
-| image     = John.jpg
+| image     = rulebook.png
 | titletext = It's definitely an intentional foul, but we've decided it's worth it.
 }}

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 | date      = July 17, 2015
 | title     = Rulebook
-| image     = rulebook.png
+| image     = John.jpg
 | titletext = It's definitely an intentional foul, but we've decided it's worth it.
 }}