Yes, just like how laws & codes are a basic part of society and built into the fabric of culture...and, yes, "the structure is such that breaking rules" (laws/codes) "is often smart play" for the criminal as well.
It’s not cheating, it’s accepting the potential punishment as worth the risk."
(Yeah, just like criminals accept the "potential punishment as worth the risk" of getting away with XYZ.
"Sports is all about risk and reward, you take actions (prescribed and proscribed by the rule book) knowing that it could go well or it could go poorly.
So is life. Your philosophy applies to criminals and potential criminals and even those who engage in criminal activity (& not YET been caught) as well.
And remember the “punishment” for under inflated balls is they switch them and/ or fix them. Exactly what happened.
Not good enough. In baseball, if you cheat with a corked bat, and it's discovered, somebody can get tossed. If a pitcher cheats with a foreign substance, somebody can get tossed.
In football, the only penalty is a post-game financial one. That needs to be fixed. When the Pats were found to be cheating in that game by halftime, the head coach (or identified cheater) should have been tossed.
Nope. Not like them at all. You see laws are about defining and defending rights (at least they’re supposed to be, there’s a whole other discussion to be had about the dumb laws we spawn vast quantities of today). If I break some law I’m violating somebody’s rights.
Rules in sports are about structuring a style of play that the league feels will enhance the viewing experience, making the game more entertaining, thus more watched, thus increasing revenue. Holding is against the rules in all sports because all the leagues have figured out that impeded movement of the players slows the game, reduces the action, and makes the game less fun to watch. No one’s rights are being violated when a football player holds another, all he’s doing is keeping the game from working the way the league WANTS it to. And if (when really) the league finds that the rules as written aren’t having the play results desired they change them. Defensive PI was greatly expanded in the 70s because the league felt the Steel Curtain and Purple People Eater were resulting in a slower lower scoring less exciting game. Offensive PI was expanded because they were tired of Michael Irvin shoving defenders to the ground.
So there’s simply no parallel between societal laws and sports rules. And trying to draw them is simply lazy strawman errecting.