16 replies to this topic

[monter]

Saw this video, and this looks like it happened here in Texas (Driscoll). It looks very similar to, but a modification of, that "Wrong Ball" play...

Here's the play

So, legal or not?

[TXMike]

Saw this video, and this looks like it happened here in Texas (Driscoll). It looks very similar to, but a modification of, that "Wrong Ball" play...

Here's the play

So, legal or not?

There are 2 issues on the play. One of which all officials agree on, it is illegal use of equipment to confuse opponents. Clear foul, just like the "wrong ball" play you mentioned. This apparently was used after the team had just been penalized for 5 yards and the QB is yelling something indicating he needs the ball to give to the official as they did not mark off enough yards. The penalty for this foul is 15 yards from previous spot.

The other issue is debatable. Some officials are calling the "snap" illegal, claiming the snapper lifts the ball before moving it backwards. If that is what they saw, then that is an illegal snap and play really never got started. That is a 5 yard penalty from previous spot. I am in the camp of those okaying the snap as it looks not much worse than many snaps I see at the middle school level.

[monter]

There are 2 issues on the play. One of which all officials agree on, it is illegal use of equipment to confuse opponents. Clear foul, just like the "wrong ball" play you mentioned. This apparently was used after the team had just been penalized for 5 yards and the QB is yelling something indicating he needs the ball to give to the official as they did not mark off enough yards. The penalty for this foul is 15 yards from previous spot.

The other issue is debatable. Some officials are calling the "snap" illegal, claiming the snapper lifts the ball before moving it backwards. If that is what they saw, then that is an illegal snap and play really never got started. That is a 5 yard penalty from previous spot. I am in the camp of those okaying the snap as it looks not much worse than many snaps I see at the middle school level.

To your first point, it would appear that a lot of referees let a play like this stand. It didn't look like a whistle was blown or anything, and it looks like the play stood. Is this something that is just unexpected (since refs probably don't see it much), and therefore isn't flagged? If it's illegal use of equipment (what's the signal for that, anyway??), wouldn't they stop the play and penalize the 15 yards immediately?

[TXMike]

To your first point, it would appear that a lot of referees let a play like this stand. It didn't look like a whistle was blown or anything, and it looks like the play stood. Is this something that is just unexpected (since refs probably don't see it much), and therefore isn't flagged? If it's illegal use of equipment (what's the signal for that, anyway??), wouldn't they stop the play and penalize the 15 yards immediately?

It does appear these refs did not flag any part of the play. I attribute that to 1 or both of these factors: 1 - They were newer refs (it was a middle school game) or 2 - They were caught unaware and were not familiar with the specific rule that applied

The signal would have been the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Technically, it is a live ball foul so you should let the ball be snapped but we have been given guidance from the NCAA Rules Editor to shut it down as soon as we see what is going on and penalize immediately

[monter]

It does appear these refs did not flag any part of the play. I attribute that to 1 or both of these factors: 1 - They were newer refs (it was a middle school game) or 2 - They were caught unaware and were not familiar with the specific rule that applied

The signal would have been the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Technically, it is a live ball foul so you should let the ball be snapped but we have been given guidance from the NCAA Rules Editor to shut it down as soon as we see what is going on and penalize immediately

Gotcha.

So, here's another hypothetical scenario.

Could a team line up in an illegal formation (say, 5 wide receivers to one side), and then motion into a legal formation? I don't know that they'd actually do that, I'm just asking if they could.

Also, would it be possible to have 6 "receivers" (so to speak), 2 on the LOS so the formation is legal, nobody behind center, but people in the "backfield" (behind the LOS), then motion a guy, who says "go" or something, and the center snaps the ball to him while he's running.

[TXMike]

Both of these could be done legally

[Exporter]

In the State Championship Game where S.A. Steele fooled the Denton team badly it was ruled legal.

Steel came out with a WR on each side and a RB by the QB. All the linemen just stood there with hands on hips and DID NOT MOVE AT ALL. The QB was yelling something like usual.
The ball was snapped to the QB and he stood relaxed for about a one count. The WR on the right side sauntered forward abiout three steps and then lit a shuck. The pass was caught about on the 20 yard line.
TD for Steele.

Edited by Exporter, 27 December 2010 - 07:12 PM.

[TXMike]

It was actually in the Pearland - Trinity game. It was run illegally, although not flagged (probably because the crew was surprised). At least 1, and possibly both, of the WR's did not line up properly. Instead of facing downfield, 1 (or both) faced completly sideways to the sideline. That made the player NOT a lineman and NOT a back so it created an illegal formation. There did not appear to be any communication between the sideline and the team so that part was okay

[monter]

It was actually in the Pearland - Trinity game. It was run illegally, although not flagged (probably because the crew was surprised). At least 1, and possibly both, of the WR's did not line up properly. Instead of facing downfield, 1 (or both) faced completly sideways to the sideline. That made the player NOT a lineman and NOT a back so it created an illegal formation. There did not appear to be any communication between the sideline and the team so that part was okay

Can a player line up facing the sideline? I mean, if a WR goes in motion, he's behind the LOS, but he's still facing the sideline, in some cases.

[TXMike]

Backs can face anyway they want. A player in motion would be a back. A player on the line is a lineman, even if he is a receiver, so he must face the goal line he is headed to

[monter]

Backs can face anyway they want. A player in motion would be a back. A player on the line is a lineman, even if he is a receiver, so he must face the goal line he is headed to

Ok...that's confusing. A player on the line is considered a "lineman", even if he's an eligible receiver? I think I understand that.

By the way, this particular play is a pretty hot topic on YouTube...

Edited by monter, 29 December 2010 - 03:26 PM.

[TXMike]

Yeah I have been seeing it all over the place. With any luck we will be able to show it and some similar ones at THSCA coach school and correct any misperceptions that are out there. This particular play could have been made legal very easily and i suspect it would have worked just as well.

[Exporter]

Yeah I have been seeing it all over the place. With any luck we will be able to show it and some similar ones at THSCA coach school and correct any misperceptions that are out there. This particular play could have been made legal very easily and i suspect it would have worked just as well.

Yep, Mike you are correct IT WAS IN THE PEARLAND GAME. Just too many games - got it wrong.

I recorded that game and saw that play several times. On a play like that (that is unusual) the coaches will tell the officials BEFORE the game about it. If they did then the officials thought it was alright.
These officials are amoung the most experienced in Texas H.S. football - won't you agree?

[monter]

Yep, Mike you are correct IT WAS IN THE PEARLAND GAME. Just too many games - got it wrong.

I recorded that game and saw that play several times. On a play like that (that is unusual) the coaches will tell the officials BEFORE the game about it. If they did then the officials thought it was alright.
These officials are amoung the most experienced in Texas H.S. football - won't you agree?

While I'd agree that the coaches might have told the refs about the play before the game, it was still an illegal formation, as TxMike said.

[TXMike]

These officials are amoung the most experienced in Texas H.S. football - won't you agree?

They likely were pretty experienced. But experience is no guarantee you will get it right when your number is called.

[Exporter]

It was said that "backs can FACE anyway they wat to face".

What I am about to say did happen back in the 1940s.
A Black High School from the Houston area had a head coach named
Coach Feathers.

He ran a tree deep straight Tee-Formation but he had his Qb lone up facing away from the ball - that's right - the center and the QB were butt to butt. They ran a lot of what was called "cross-bucks" and he had a winning team. We would go watch just to see that odd QB line up "funny".
In those days elgibility wan't a factor. Several of the "kids" were ex-G.I.s and 22 to 24 years old.
There was a set of twin brothers who both played end in the Tee-formation. They were over 6'2" and could run and catch. They were said to be 21 and had played on that team for 6 years.
Little things like a salute after a play wasn't even thought about.
Seems to me like it's getting too Politically Correct. 50 years ago only the big stuff was called, like clipping and offsides - back then it was unheard of to call a "pass interferrence". Things changed.

Edited by Exporter, 31 December 2010 - 04:49 PM.

[mattlipsey]

all of that should have been talked over between the coaches and the officials during their pregame conference. I wouldnt have allowed it. Im an umpire and always looking at the ball to ensure a legal snap. If its not legal i blow the play dead following laundry being thrown on the ground. A detailed pre game conference between the coaches and then the rest of the officials will hopefully decrease confusion in situations like this.