Quick Snap Down

[ohref]

A few years ago the NFHS pre-saeson bulletin for football had an article about teams that snap down from a 2 point to 3 point stance.  The teams do not snap down as part of their normal cadence, but only do it when in short yardage as a means to pull the defense off.  The article stated that this should be an unsportsmanlike penalty.  I can not find the article but it is becoming an issue locally.  Can anyone help me out here?

[east louis]

we've had this happen w/ teams and we nipped it in the bud--especially on XPT attempts---FALSE START for the offense/kicking team---intent is to make defense encroach,simulating action before the snap--teams will adjust

[busman]

7.1.7

[lawdog]

7.1.7

Had a very similar thing last night in a JV game.  Wing back going in motion was snapping up and then turning to go into motion.  We told the coach it was a false start and would be flagged if he continued to attempt to simulate a snap with the start of his motion.  It didn't happen anymore and you just know it was taught to see if they could get away with it.  KEEP EM HONEST!!!!!

[AlUpstateNY]

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

[Watson]

The NFHS said it's unsportsmanlike conduct for the defense to rush the line or stomp their feet or similar in an effort to get A to jump into the neutral zone or false start. 9-5-1d. Five yards if offense does something to make B jump but 15 if defense does essentially the same thing. Go figure.

[LarryW60]

The difference is the offense USUALLY commits a false start erroneously in an attempt to get started on the play (sometimes it can be intentional, as in the case of the OP).  The defense attempting to cause the offensive line to flinch is ALWAYS intentional.  For those intentional attempts by A to draw B into the neutral zone, the 5-yard penalty is enough to end their quest for a "slop" first down.

[Curious]

7.1.7

A VARIATION:

Had a coach advise us pre-game that he would occasionally run an unbalanced formation and, in certain circumstances, he would SHIFT AN INTERIOR (BUT NOT RESTRICTED) LINEMAN to ANOTHER POSITION ON THE LINE - creating the strong side. He advised that the interior lineman would come to the LOS and remain in a two-point stance, would not have his hand on or near the ground, and would would move "extremely slowly" so as not to simulate action at the snap.  He did indicate that he might use this in a "3rd/4th down and <5 to go" situation and this "could cause the defense to encroach".

Since any offensive player may shift - and interior linemen don't become restricted until their hand(s) are on or near the ground, we advised him that, under the strict conditions he outlined, the play appeared "legal".

Sure enough, 4th and 4, 4th quarter, he ran the "shift" drawing the defense offside.

I know what 7-1-7 says and have read all the case book plays.  We allowed it - but it still gives me heartburn.  I'd also have heartburn if we prevented an offense from using a legal tactic (a shift),  I know AB would never run this play....

Thoughts?
 

[bama_stripes]

Curious, I've had the exact situation you describe a few times.  We're always very strict about applying the term "simulate action at the snap" on those occasions.

What I've found is that it's the action of the quarterback, rather than the linemen, that determines whether it's a false start.  When it's a routine "flip-flop" of the strength of the formation, the QB never goes under center until the shift is complete.  When they're really trying to get the free 5 yards, the QB is invariably either under center, or calling signals of some sort.

[VALJ]

A VARIATION:

Had a coach advise us pre-game that he would occasionally run an unbalanced formation and, in certain circumstances, he would SHIFT AN INTERIOR (BUT NOT RESTRICTED) LINEMAN to ANOTHER POSITION ON THE LINE - creating the strong side. He advised that the interior lineman would come to the LOS and remain in a two-point stance, would not have his hand on or near the ground, and would would move "extremely slowly" so as not to simulate action at the snap.  He did indicate that he might use this in a "3rd/4th down and <5 to go" situation and this "could cause the defense to encroach".

We've got one team in our area that runs something similar to this with their whole line.  They'll line up unbalanced in a  two-point stance, then the entire line will stand up and switch sides of the snapper.  So they'll go from unbalanced towards the right side of the field to unbalanced from the left side of the field. 

They do everything legally, and the defense has enough time to get adjusted.  I sure as heck was glad that the coach gave me a headsup in our meeting pregame, though.