Disconcerting Signals

[TXMike]

Very troubling situation last night.  Team A is a team that frequently snaps on the first sound.  Team B LB would periodically yell "Move" once the offense was set.  1 or more defensive linemen would quickly slide left or right.  However, frequently  1 or more Team A players would move forward at the same moment.  7 false starts against Team A, most of which were at critical moments.  Team A's coach was beside himself trying to get us to flag the defense.  If the defense used any sounds that were like those used in the snap count, I see the foul.  If they yelled "Move" and nobody was actually moving, I see the foul.  But the way they were doing it seems to skirt the rules.  Has anyone ever flagged defense for disconcerting signals?  If so, what were they doing?

[NVFOA_Ump]

Once it became obvious that Team A is using a first sound snap count and team B's defensive signals were interfering with that process, IMO it time to put a stop to the team B signaling in that manner.

The rule that the defense must comply with IMO is pretty clear (7.1.5.a. Defensive Team Requirements) " 3. No player shall use words or signals that disconcert opponents when they are preparing to put the ball in play. No player may call defensive signals that simulate the sound or cadence of (or otherwise interfere with) offensive starting signals." 

That fact that they were apparently legimitate defensive signal calls does not matter, what matters is that they did in fact interfere with the Team A signal process, therefore it's a Team B foul.

[The Ref Thats Lef]

Sorry NVFOA_Ump

I can't follow the logic. Are you saying that if team B make a legitimate defensive cadence (and I cannot see the word move simulating an offensive one) and the offence reacts this is a call on the defence for disconcerting signals. Following that to it's conclusion all the offence needs to do is 'false start' at any defensive sound to be awarded 5 yards.

Would you call the defence every time they shouted move and there was no reaction from the offence? This penalty is one regardless of if the offence reacts or not and so you should do.

It would be interesting to know if the defensive team used the same calls the week before.

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'm not sure why is there even any question here. This rule is one of the very few in the entire book that leaves no room for interpretation.  It says very clearly (the actual wording in the rule) " ... No player may call defensive signals that simulate the sound or cadence of (or otherwise interfere with) offensive starting signals ... "

Even if the defensive calls have been the same for years, when they clearly interfere with the offensive signal calling, they need to change what they are doing. There is no "legitimate defensive cadence" that directly results in a false start more than once, much less "7 false starts .... most of which were at critical moments". We could flag team A the first time when it happens but team B would get a stern warning to modify their calls since the rules give team A a 100% right to offensive starting signals that are not interfered with by B, otherwise the 2nd time the same thing happens, the flag goes to B.

[110]

We could flag team A the first time when it happens but team B would get a stern warning to modify their calls since the rules give team A a 100% right to offensive starting signals that are not interfered with by B, otherwise the 2nd time the same thing happens, the flag goes to B.

I think this gets into a grey area - we're being asked to interpret intent of signals. If the defence is pondering a blitz, and the middle linebacker, up on the d-line, turns around calls it off with "cancel," at the last minute, before backing away do we flag them if the offence flinches for an obvious change of defensive set?

What if there's a safety blitz planned in addition to a blitz package, and the middle linebacker opts to call that off with a code-word, "blue! blue!" but doesn't turn in the safety's direction, and the offence flinches? Is the defence not allowed some measure of communication as well? Why would we penalize the defence for the same rights we grant the offence?

What if the offence sends out a bunch formation right, and the linebacker calls out "roger, roger!" to call for a defence against a strong-right formation? If the offence flinches, is that a penalty?

Now, if the defence is yelling "hut! Hut" or some other sound that simulates the offensive cadence here, sure. But the above three examples are pretty darn common, I'd think.

Your "shift" situation seems greyer. I would like to know if this was done the week before. In the same vein, it has the potential to be more legal than not, but if concocted to screw up the offence, clearly otherwise.

<devil's advocate>
Defensive communication ought not to be silenced just because the offence is doing something odd, like a first-sound snap. Heck, the solution here is simple, really: the offence shifts to a "standard" cadence to avoid the procedure infractions.
</devil's advocate>

And just for giggles:
What if the offence calls out an option play at the LOS, with the quarterback calling out "hamburger! hamburger!" and the tight end confirming with the counter-phrase "cheeseburger!" On the fifth or sixth time they do this, the defensive end pipes up with "Large fries!" (This actually happened in a game last week, fwiw. Everybody cackled, no coaches went ballistic, and the game continued as normal.)

[NVFOA_Ump]

I think this gets into a grey area - we're being asked to interpret intent of signals.

No interpretation if intent needed.  The rule simply says that B cannot interfere with A's signal calling, there's no "intent" component in the rule.  The case play here is black and white IMO - they are clearly interfering.  Further, A never has to change their signals, if there's an interference with signal calling related to the actual snap, B has to change their signal calling.

[TXMike]

Kids false start all the time without the defense sayinjg or doing anything.  How can you determine that it was what the defense did that made them jump?

[ballhog]

I do not think the intent of the rule was to "handcuff" the defense by not allowing them to adjust to formations. The defense has as much right to hide then adjust their alignment as the offense (actually more since they are not restricted by shift rules). Because the offense has chosen to use first sound they should not be allowed to prevent the defense from adjusting. We have a OC here that uses first sound of the defense as his snap count in an attempt to catch the defense during a shift. 

[NVFOA_Ump]

Do we determine B's "intent" when a B player jumps into the NZ and an A threatened A player immediately responds and moves?  If an A player immediately responds to a B verbal call that follows A being set and ready to snap what's the difference?  And while I could see some leeway regarding one or two instances during an entire game, the problem posted in the original case play is flat out flagrant - that's 100% against 7.1.5.a.3 and IMO must be called.

[ABoselli]

I have to 100% disagree.

The offense is free to snap it on any number - including 2, 3 or 5. There is no restriction saying they have to go on the first sound on every play. Their collective decision for willingly snap it on the first sound cannot place a de facto gag order the defense's ability to call their own signal.

The defense is calling out a signal with a reasonable word - something other than "HUT!" and they are actually moving. It isn't an empty command. There is always the risk (if they are doing this movement for the sole reason of making the offense false start) that they will move into a defensive alignment that now places them at a disadvantage to defend the formation and play in front of them. 

The game is full of adjustments by each side. Defense is calling out a signal? Go on 2. Go on a silent count. Do something to counter it legally. Offense is going on first sound all game and they all of a sudden go on 2 and you get caught offside? Too bad - adjust to them now.

My bar is very high for a disconcerting signals foul. I, or the umpire, have to hear words that mimic that QB's chosen cadence - HUT, or GO, or READY - and I have to see an offensive player react.

[Atlanta Blue]

I'm not sure why is there even any question here. This rule is one of the very few in the entire book that leaves no room for interpretation.  It says very clearly (the actual wording in the rule) " ... No player may call defensive signals that simulate the sound or cadence of (or otherwise interfere with) offensive starting signals ... "

Even if the defensive calls have been the same for years, when they clearly interfere with the offensive signal calling, they need to change what they are doing. There is no "legitimate defensive cadence" that directly results in a false start more than ounce, much less "7 false starts .... most of which were at critical moments". We could flag team A the first time when it happens but team B would get a stern warning to modify their calls since the rules give team A a 100% right to offensive starting signals that are not interfered with by B, otherwise the 2nd time the same thing happens, the flag goes to B.

You are interpreting "or otherwise interfere with" to be it's own independent clause.  It's not.  The defense may not simulate the sound or the cadence in a way that interferes with the offensive cadence.  The rule in no way restricts the defense from calling their own signals that do not simulate the sound or cadence of the offensive signals.

You said, "This rule is one of the very few in the entire book that leaves no room for interpretation."  Clearly that's incorrect, as your interpretation is one not intended by the rule.

[Welpe]

I have to 100% disagree.

The offense is free to snap it on any number - including 2, 3 or 5. There is no restriction saying they have to go on the first sound on every play. Their collective decision for willingly snap it on the first sound cannot place a de facto gag order the defense's ability to call their own signal.

The defense is calling out a signal with a reasonable word - something other than "HUT!" and they are actually moving. It isn't an empty command. There is always the risk (if they are doing this movement for the sole reason of making the offense false start) that they will move into a defensive alignment that now places them at a disadvantage to defend the formation and play in front of them. 

The game is full of adjustments by each side. Defense is calling out a signal? Go on 2. Go on a silent count. Do something to counter it legally. Offense is going on first sound all game and they all of a sudden go on 2 and you get caught offside? Too bad - adjust to them now.

My bar is very high for a disconcerting signals foul. I, or the umpire, have to hear words that mimic that QB's chosen cadence - HUT, or GO, or READY - and I have to see an offensive player react.

Well said, I completely agree with you.  We can't completely handcuff the defense from calling their own signals and I think it is quite unreasonable to expect them to call out no signals at all.

[NVFOA_Ump]

I did not at any time suggest that B must remain silent, but I did say that when A has done their ready, down set, or what ever they do, that B cannot in virtual sequence then bark out the next call as described in the case play.

I see no conflict whatsoever with B's right to call defensive signals but also saying that they cannot do what's described here.  IMO there is no judgment needed when A is responding directly to B's call, and doing it multiple times - that's interfering with A's snap count.

[TXMike]

Roy - the offensive team that knows this is your judgment will jump every time Team B gives a signal so they will get a free 5 yards each time.  That ain't right.

[blindref757]

I had this Friday night.  The defense clearly yelled Shift right after the QB made his first sound.  The offense jumped in reaction to the sound of the D.  I felt like it was sort of tricky...but the wording clearly was Shift.  I just turned to the middle LB who made the call and told him that since there was nobody in motion all night, that he would need to make his call prior to the QB starting his cadence.  He agreed and we didn't have any further issues.

[TXMike]

Did the O use "shift" ever in their cadence?  When the LB yelled, did nyone from D shift?

[NVFOA_Ump]

So we flag team A 7 times on critical 3rd down plays (the original thread posting) since we don't think that B is interfering with A's right to have a fair chance at a snap count with out defensive interference?  Sorry Mike, but IMO that's beyond weak, and not close to being in compliance with the rules or with the intent of the rules.

[TXMike]

I never said it was always on 3d down.  Just said it was at critical moments.  Anytime you back the O up 5 yards you are affecting them on that series. 

Part of what was going on was the kids had been coached all week to expect that from the defense.  They had it so ingrained in their heads that they were thinking about that more than about what they should be doing.  There were times when there was a defense call but no reaction from the O. 

[Dr.G]

Having played offensive line at the collegiate level and now officiate at the U position at the high school level, it all comes down to what is being said. As an offensive lineman, I know what my go signal is and what my signal caller sounds like. The defense can make all the calls and movements they want. As long as the go signal isn't the same or sounds the same I always knew when to go even in loud games when hearing was tough. If you think its the same, flag it. When I can tell the difference between the signals standing at my position then we have nothing. This happened in my game last week. The calls were similar, but I could tell the difference pretty easily. These players hear their signals hundreds of times everyday in practice. They know what they sound like. Its pretty easy to tell if this is the normal call or a call to entice the offense. I talk with LB like blindref757 does.

[blindref757]

Did the O use "shift" ever in their cadence?  When the LB yelled, did nyone from D shift?

No and Yes to those two questions.

The first time they did it, it worked.  The O jumped and we flagged them for false start.  It was at a critical time...3rd and 2.  They took notes and they didn't jump again.  The D tried it again in the 4th quarter a couple of times...the LB gave his signal simultaneous with the QB.  Wasn't an issue.

[With_Two_Flakes]

Has anyone ever flagged defense for disconcerting signals?  If so, what were they doing?

Yes, I have flagged it maybe 4 or 5 times in 25 years of officiating. Every time the defence were yelling HUT or something real close to it.

[James]

I've called it 2-3 times in 10 years. Defense 'jumping' the QBs calls (either SET or HUT).

As for NVFOA_Ump's comments - I think he is being way too hard on the defense. They need to be able to communicate as well. They are not INTERFERING with the offensive start signal, they are doing their own signal. Since the Offense decided to go on first sound they need to make sure they can hear that it is the first sound of their team!

[KB]

What's the deal?

IF the offense are starting at ANY acoustic signal, then surely the snapper will snap the ball as soon as he hears the "move".
Therefore the only bad thing that can happen is a muffed snap by the QB, but NOT a false start.

Since the snapper obviously did not react to the "move", the claim that the offense starts at any sound is bogus.

If they want to deprave the defense from using ANY acoustic signal by making that bogus claim, they have a big problem with understanding the spirit of the rules and that thing called sportsmanship.

Throw the IDIOT "coach" out of the stadium ASAP.

[NVFOA_Ump]

What's the deal?

IF the offense are starting at ANY acoustic signal, then surely the snapper will snap the ball as soon as he hears the "move".
Therefore the only bad thing that can happen is a muffed snap by the QB, but NOT a false start.

Since the snapper obviously did not react to the "move", the claim that the offense starts at any sound is bogus.

But the snapper is just a foot two directly in front of the QB - IMO a lot harder for the tackles and tight end to differentiate the call that they hear coming from the same direction and area as the QB.

[110]

But the snapper is just a foot two directly in front of the QB - IMO a lot harder for the tackles and tight end to differentiate the call that they hear coming from the same direction and area as the QB.

Again, why would we penalize the defence? If playing a team with a normal cadence does not net a penalty for simply calling "shift," why would the defence be penalized for engaging in the same actions in a different game, just becuase the offensive team is using a first-sound snap policy? An act that is legal in one game must be legal in the next. In that light, I'd be tempted to suggest that the offense must adapt, not the defense. If the O flinches on a legitimate "shift" order, the O gets its illegal procedure/false start.

I stress - an act that is legal in one game, ought not to be illegal in another. Consistency. It's what coaches want: and we should strive to deliver it.