Illegal Motion/False Start??

[Derek Teigen]

I had a JV game last night and one of the teams ran I guess what you call a flexible wishbone with two half backs lined up just outside of the tackles but off the line of scrimmage.  They would start the play standing and facing somewhat in towards the center.  On signal from the qb one of the half backs would start in motion.

One of the motion halfbacks was often uncertain as to when he should begin his motion and so would start his motion stop and then start and start again by taking small steps...maybe stuttering is the best word.  He was not moving forward but back and lateral to the line of scrimmage.  I flagged this player twice for false start.....(dead ball foul).

But in hindsight and now reviewing the play in my mind I wonder if it should have been called as illegal motion?  (Live ball foul)  Did I give enough information for anybody to give me their thoughts?

[NVFOA_Ump]

As long as the motion is parallel to or away from line of scrimmage and does not simulate the start of a play IMO it's legal.  A look at virtually all of the games on TV (NFHS, college, NFL) that all allow one player in motion have a very wide variation in the actual motion and as long as it is not toward the LOS and doesn't simulate the start of a play it doesn't get flagged.

[AlUpstateNY]

As long as the motion is parallel to or away from line of scrimmage and does not simulate the start of a play IMO it's legal.  A look at virtually all of the games on TV (NFHS, college, NFL) that all allow one player in motion have a very wide variation in the actual motion and as long as it is not toward the LOS and doesn't simulate the start of a play it doesn't get flagged.

Not an unusual, or uncommon, ploy, in critical short yardage situations; a back, having repeatedly gone in motion with his initial movement appropriately starting left or right into legal motion, chooses to explode out of a 3 point, or otherwise set position, before immediately going in otherwise legal motion, drawing (or hoping to) a defensive player into the NZ.

Immediately recognizing, and penalizing, that (successful or not) as a "False Start" will usually reduce the risk of repeated attempts.

[Magician]

I believe that formation is called a wing T. We have several schools here that still run it. The motion is often very sudden and some people argue it alone should be a false start. If he starts and stops and starts again I think you could justify a false start. If he starts quickly shortly before the snap though we let it go because everyone has seen the offense enough to know what this. You definitely don't have illegal motion.

[AlUpstateNY]

The motion is often very sudden and some people argue it alone should be a false start.

When the motion is uniquely abrupt, and coincidentally happens during a short yardage situation, what part of NFHS 7-1-7 (a) "A shift or feigned charge simulates action at the snap", or (b) "Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach." might "some people" be comfortable with?

[HLinNC]

It was the flex bone or double wing- ran by most of the service academies now and Paul Johnson at Ga. Southern, Navy, and Ga. Tech and by my son's HS team 3-4 years ago.  The wings are called A backs and the set back or fullback is a B back.  It's quite common for one of the A backs to go in motion and often reverse course.

While an abrupt start may appear to be mimicking the snap, nothing about it is illegal motion-

Motion is a key component to the job a slot back must do.  Since most motions are not called, the slot must learn when and how to properly execute these motions.  The first motion, is the two-step motion, which as the name implies, means the slot will take two steps toward their aiming point before the ball is snapped.  The aiming point is the heels of the B back, as shown in figure 11-7.  The cadence is a rhythmic cadence which allows for the slot to leave at a certain part of the cadence, which was discussed in Chapter three.  On two step motion, the slot, upon hearing the s in the word set should push off the outside foot, opening the inside foot to where the toe is pointing to the aiming point.     

[Magician]

When the motion is uniquely abrupt, and coincidentally happens during a short yardage situation, what part of NFHS 7-1-7 (a) "A shift or feigned charge simulates action at the snap", or (b) "Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach." might "some people" be comfortable with?

This is a formation they use the entire game and probably put one of the wings in motion 75% of the time. It's not a short yardage-only thing. That's why it doesn't draw any encroachment.

[AlUpstateNY]

This is a formation they use the entire game and probably put one of the wings in motion 75% of the time. It's not a short yardage-only thing. That's why it doesn't draw any encroachment.

Apparently, I'm not explaining myself very well.  Allow me to try one last time.  I was merely suggesting a caution.  Usually ONLY when in a critical short yardage situation, a back (in any type formation) looking to draw the defense into the NZ, prematurely explodes out of his set position, hoping to draw the defense into encroaching.  If he fails to do so, he simply turns one way or the other, and goes in motion, hoping No flag/no foul.

However, If he's successful, and the defense bites and is nailed for Encroachment, cheap 1st down. 

If his attempt is ignored, be prepared to see it again if another critical short yardage situation arises.  If EITHER the action successfully draws the defense into the NZ, or the defense DOESN'T bite, but the flag that's thrown is for a False Start, it's doubtful it will be tried again.  Simply be wary of the tactic, it can be very effective.

[Magician]

Apparently, I'm not explaining myself very well.  Allow me to try one last time.  I was merely suggesting a caution.  Usually ONLY when in a critical short yardage situation, a back (in any type formation) looking to draw the defense into the NZ, prematurely explodes out of his set position, hoping to draw the defense into encroaching.  If he fails to do so, he simply turns one way or the other, and goes in motion, hoping No flag/no foul.

However, If he's successful, and the defense bites and is nailed for Encroachment, cheap 1st down. 

If his attempt is ignored, be prepared to see it again if another critical short yardage situation arises.  If EITHER the action successfully draws the defense into the NZ, or the defense DOESN'T bite, but the flag that's thrown is for a False Start, it's doubtful it will be tried again.  Simply be wary of the tactic, it can be very effective.

You are correct if that was the question presented. This offense is more common in some parts of the country than others. We probably see it 2-3 times per year so it's not unusual to us. I have talked with officials in other parts of the country though who see this for the first time and automatically flag it as a false start because they aren't familiar with it.

[refjeff]

... and so would start his motion stop and then start and start again by taking small steps...maybe stuttering is the best word.  He was not moving forward but back and lateral to the line of scrimmage. 

  I don't think you have foul.  Nothing you describe sounds like he "simulates action at the snap," so it's not a false start, and if he's not going forward it's not illegal motion.

Although the Flex-bone and Wing-T offenses may both utilize double wing and unbalanced formations, they are not the same thing.  The Wing-T is a trap and counter based offense, with lots of pulling linemen, and the QB really only runs the ball on the bootleg/waggle.  The Flex-bone is an option based offense and the QB is the 1st or 2nd rusher.  There are teams that incorporate elements of both.

[HLinNC]

Apparently, I'm not explaining myself very well.

The response really has nothing to do with the original play as described.  No short yardage or attempt to draw encroachment was described in the original post.   He apparently just came across an offense he's not seen before. 

[AlUpstateNY]

The situation (attempted to describe) applies to any/ALL Offensive alignments.  It references a caution related to a deliberately, covert attempt to draw the defense into an encroachment, by way of a (somewhat exaggerated) movement by a (any) back, who may use a subsequent conversion into a legal motion to conceal his intent.

[CalhounLJ]

I’m confused. What exactly are we arguing about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk