Legal Commentary

It's a real challenge to turn the last seconds of one of the most exciting Super Bowls in recent memory into a rather dullish procedure issue, but I can't help myself.  With one second left on the game clock and the outcome certain, Pats coach Bill Belichik effectively conceded by crossing the field to shake hands with opposing Giants coach Tom Coughlin.  He then quickly exited the playing area, a move for which others have excoriated him.

I won't comment on the normative propriety of his conduct; my question is, as usual, procedural.  Various commenters have stated that Belichik could not concede the loss without causing an official forfeit (I can't find that rule in my quick skim of the 2006 official NFL rulebook, but I don't doubt it to be true).  My question is: Why not?

Now, I understand that the goals of the civil litigation rule system, with which I am more familiar, are different than the goals of the NFL rule system.   Simplistically speaking, civil rules strive to balance the search for truth, justice, fairness, efficiency, predictability, and the adversarial system.   The NFL has similar goals (though perhaps it strikes a different balance) plus the additional important goal of entertainment value.

It is possible that the goals of the NFL rule system are furthered by preventing an opposing coach from conceding the game one second early, but I'm hard-pressed to see it here.  What overriding policy reason required the officials to spend several minutes ordering players, coaches, fans, and media personnel off the field and into their respective places just to have that one second tick off the clock, abruptly and tediously interrupting a well-deserved celebration in the biggest game of the year?