Team A Attempting to Draw an Offside

[TXMike]

Is this an illegal attempt by Team A to draw Team B into an offside?

[yt=425,350]1dSjexbyT2Q[/yt]

[Atlanta Blue]

Is AN attempt?  Sure.  Is it an ILLEGAL attempt?  I don't think so, no more than a hard count would be.

[chymechowder]

the motion man's movements are kinda funny. he initially comes up in a smooth fashion, but then does a hurried foot-stomp when he simulates going in motion. it almost looks like the "leg equivalent" of a quarterback chucking his hands towards the center.  I don't have him simulating the start of a play, though. so no foul.

[RedTD]

This is a "normal" movement for West Point. They do it on almost every series.

[DallasLJ]

I was working on the chains during that game and he did that 6 or 7 times.  I thought it was a false start -- he is certainly simulating the start of the play, and was not a rhythmic motion.  Most times after getting reset, he would then go in motion.  Just my humble thoughts.

 
 

[jrfath]

We had a school doing a motion simlar to this the past season.  After seeing it early in the season, the R's and supervisor talked about it.  It was decided that this did constitute a false start.  After sharing this with the coach at the next game, the team did not do it anymore.

[MJT]

The reason why this is not a foul with Army is that they run it like this all the time. If you watched the game, they will start an guy, and he will come back, and then go just like before as part of their regular offense. Their opponents know this, so it is not as if they are doing something different just cuz it is 4th and short.

[DallasLJ]

The reason why this is not a foul with Army is that they run it like this all the time. If you watched the game, they will start an guy, and he will come back, and then go just like before as part of their regular offense. Their opponents know this, so it is not as if they are doing something different just cuz it is 4th and short.

  I agree they did it all game long, and it did not draw the defense off.  But that does not mean that it is technically not a False Start.  They guy is clearly simulating the start of the play -- what other purpose is there to the action.  It is neither smooth, nor rhythmic.  It is a quick, sudden movement at full speed for about 4 or 5 steps and then he re-sets.  Can anyone say that is the tailback did this it wouldn't be flagged.

[TXMike]

This is a "normal" movement for West Point. They do it on almost every series.

If they do it most every series doesnt't this then fit the definition of "simulatung the start of a play"?

[110]

If they do it most every series doesnt't this then fit the definition of "simulatung the start of a play"?

My "gut" reaction was ... "this isn't quite right."

It wasn't "that'swrongwhistleflag," however.

In a similar discussion elsewhere this year, there was some chatter about flagging the FS (IP for us Canoodians) only if the defence jumps. Might that apply here (says he, stirring the post-season pot.)

[AlUpstateNY]

The reason why this is not a foul with Army is that they run it like this all the time. If you watched the game, they will start an guy, and he will come back, and then go just like before as part of their regular offense. Their opponents know this, so it is not as if they are doing something different just cuz it is 4th and short.

That makes sense, so If the offense decides to hold on every play, as long as the defense is aware of their practice, the holding is allowed? 

This is simply BS, and no matter how well or consistently you apply BS won't remove it's odor.  If you want to deal with the smell of BS the entire game that's up to you, but you might consider simply explaining to the coach, either before the game or the first time it happens, that you consider it BS and will respond accordingly.

[texref]

I don't have a problem with it since he is going backwards (away from the LOS) both times. The Air Force Academy runs the same thing a lot. I haven't seen it called much.

[DallasLJ]

I don't have a problem with it since he is going backwards (away from the LOS) both times. The Air Force Academy runs the same thing a lot. I haven't seen it called much.

  False start does not require the motion to be forward -- just actions simulating the start of the play. 

  I agree with last post -- tell the coach first time that you consider it illegal, and will flag it next time -- kind of like when those tackles are a little too far back and you warn them to get up before you start throwing the flag.

[MJT]

That makes sense, so If the offense decides to hold on every play, as long as the defense is aware of their practice, the holding is allowed? 

This is simply BS, and no matter how well or consistently you apply BS won't remove it's odor.  If you want to deal with the smell of BS the entire game that's up to you, but you might consider simply explaining to the coach, either before the game or the first time it happens, that you consider it BS and will respond accordingly.

BS? Let's see... he goes in motion backwards, not with an extremely quick motion, and it is backwards. He then speeds up, and then while still moving backwards, stops quickly. He goes back and does it again. If you watched the entire game, he would do this on a regular play, and on the 2nd or 3rd time, they would snap the ball. The double wing T offense is based on a back going in motion backwards just prior to the snap on most every play. This is what the run, and it doesn't get called. It is ran from 7th grade, all the way up to D-1, and it does not get called for a FST.

Your analogy of holding on every play, is not at all similar to this. Unless you want some real discussion, and not attacking my post, I will not reply again. I am just telling you the reality of this offense.

[cwag]

I agree with Livin' on this.

I was there with DallasLJ.  I'm surprised he saw anything since he was flirting with the Army ball girl all game!!!  She was smokin' hot...better looking than most of the SMU cheerleaders.

If I remember correctly, one of the crew told DallasLJ they discussed it in pregame.

[RedTD]

If they do it most every series doesnt't this then fit the definition of "simulatung the start of a play"?

Just commenting that that is their "normal" motion prior to the snap. If not called earlier in the game how can you call it on this play ? I agree it is very close.

[AlUpstateNY]

BS? Let's see... he goes in motion backwards, not with an extremely quick motion, and it is backwards. He then speeds up, and then while still moving backwards, stops quickly. He goes back and does it again. Your analogy of holding on every play, is not at all similar to this. Unless you want some real discussion, and not attacking my post, I will not reply again. I am just telling you the reality of this offense.

Isn't there something about,  "simulating action at the snap" as being a false start?  Perhaps there's a regional difference in what that means, but doesn't, "he goes in motion backwards, not with an extremely quick motion, and it is backwards. He then speeds up, and then while still moving backwards, stops quickly. He goes back and does it again." satisfy that description. 

We all understand about "hard counts" and quirky little things some players do to try and stay just below that "simulating action at the snap" line, but when YOU understand a player is doing whatever, to fool an opponent into believing there's a snap, that's  just wrong. 

You've got several choices;  you can ignore it - let the defense beware, you can flag it as a false start or you might whisper in that player's (or his coaches) ear to simply knock it off, as you consider it illegal.  The choice is yours, if you want to deal with the same (excuse me) BS all game, you can do that but nobody repeats themself exactly the same over and over.  Remember the objective is to NOT try and fool an opponent that a snap is about to happen. 

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'd agree that this motion seems to cross the line due mainly to the abrupt stop component but there's an additional advantage that A may be gaining here as well.  By doing this regularly and in some cases 2-3 times A also attempts to create the idea that the snap is not imminent.  That gives A the advantage that 1 or more of the B players may be waiting for the "motion" guy to complete his dancing before the ball is snapped.  If they never snapped the ball just as he comes to a screeching halt then maybe there's no issue but I thought that they did snap it a few times during the game.

[Rulesman]

It is a bu!!$h!t play that one would expect from some schools, but certainly not from a service academy. Whatever happened to "We will not lie, steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does."

[TXMike]

It has been quite awhile since I coached so I don't know if this is the reason or not, but I suppose it is possible the offense does this to see how the defense will react based on whatever defense has been called.  Once the QB sees how they will react he can stick with the called play or audible into a new one possibly.  That would not seem illegal.   I guess we will have to ask the coach why he was doing that.  ;-)

[BankerRef]

  False start does not require the motion to be forward -- just actions simulating the start of the play. 

  I agree with last post -- tell the coach first time that you consider it illegal, and will flag it next time -- kind of like when those tackles are a little too far back and you warn them to get up before you start throwing the flag.

At no point in that clip did I see anything that I thought simulated the start of a play.

My philosophy for false starts (unlike formation issues) has always been that there is no warning issued.  I also have followed a very simple rule regarding simulating the start of a play,  if the action fools me into thinking a play has started it gets flagged, if I'm not fooled it doesn't.   

[JasonTX]

,  if the action fools me into thinking a play has started it gets flagged, if I'm not fooled it doesn't.   

Excellent advice.   

[Bullycon]

Is this an illegal attempt by Team A to draw Team B into an offside?

I don't see it as such.

I didn't see the game, but based on games I've seen with similar offenses, the motion man went in motion in a manner consistent with the motion immediately prior to the snap. If it's not a foul just before they snap it, it's not a foul just before they don't snap it.

[DallasLJ]

I don't see it as such.

I didn't see the game, but based on games I've seen with similar offenses, the motion man went in motion in a manner consistent with the motion immediately prior to the snap. If it's not a foul just before they snap it, it's not a foul just before they don't snap it.

  I was at the game and that is not how it looked.  This backs actions were different for this action and when he would go in motion.  On these abrupt quick moves, they were back towards the QB as if the play started and he was going to receive the hand-off.  After about 4 full speed steps he would stop and jog back to his original position.  Most of the times that he made this quick move, he would then stand up, turn slowly and go in motion between the line and the QB -- not back towards the QB as with the prior motion.