Post by: FLAHL on August 23, 2018, 02:17:11 AM
Is this a foul because he did not complete his shift and remain set for one second?
Or is it ok because he was in motion and was not moving forward?
“ART. 6 . . . After a huddle or shift all 11 players of A shall come to an absolute stop and shall remain stationary simultaneously without movement of hands, feet, head or body for at least one second before the snap.
ART. 7 . . . Only one A player may be in motion at the snap and then only if such motion is not toward his opponent’s goal line”
Post by: Stinterp on August 23, 2018, 06:15:03 AM
Post by: Brian26 on August 23, 2018, 06:30:41 AM
If so it should be illegal shift if he was set 1 second before going into motion or illegal motion if he was not set for 1 second.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 06:50:01 AM
A ceased to be a player in motion when he stopped and went into a 3 point stance. Since he wasn’t stopped for at least 1 second, I have a flag for illegal shift at the snap
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 07:00:47 AM
As long as A22 was set for 1 second with all the other players before he started in motion, it is legal. If he was never set for 1 second, then illegal shift at the snap.All 11 players have to be stationary at the snap, with the exception of 1 who may be legally in motion at the snap. It doesn’t matter how many or how many times a player shifts before the snap, they all have to have been still for at least one second immediately before the snap. With the exception of the one who may be in motion.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: FLAHL on August 23, 2018, 07:35:19 AM
I think the question FLAHL is trying to get at is if A is considered to still be in motion because even though he has stopped to go into a set position he hasn’t stopped long enough to fulfill the shift requirement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks Calhoun, that’s exactly what I’m getting at. Article 6 in the OP seems to suggest this is a foul. Article 7 seems to suggest it’s ok. And the definition of a Shift indicates that it’s not a shift until the 1 second duration has been met. So if he hasn’t been set, is he still in motion? And if he’s not set AND not in motion, then what is he?
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 08:02:11 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Stinterp on August 23, 2018, 10:22:33 AM
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 10:26:35 AM
Post by: VA Official on August 23, 2018, 11:29:10 AM
Doesn't the motion of him going into a 3 point stance constitute motion towards his opponents goal line?
If so it should be illegal shift if he was set 1 second before going into motion or illegal motion if he was not set for 1 second.
You've got that a little backwards. If he was set for 1 second before going in motion with all of his teammates also set, and he is moving towards his opponent's end line at the snap, that's illegal motion. If he was never set for 1 second, that's an illegal shift.
If he stops moving his feet and he simply leans down into a 3-point stance, that shouldn't be interpreted as moving forward.
i agree completely. I would add that once the player assumed a three point stance he ceased to be in motion, and has to remain motionless for at least one second before the snap.
Calhoun, why do you think he needs to be set for one second while he's still legally in motion when going into a set position?
Post by: OHref71 on August 23, 2018, 11:37:16 AM
Post by: Stinterp on August 23, 2018, 11:46:03 AM
Post by: VA Official on August 23, 2018, 11:48:46 AM
What Calhoun is saying is if he made it to a 3 point stance and was not there for a second before the ball was snapped then it is a foul which it is. A22 can remain in motion and it would be fine but if he stops and sets he must be set for 1 second.
That's not my understanding of the motion rule. Once a player is legally in motion (meaning he has established a set position for 1 second simultaneous with all other A players and then he goes in motion), the only thing he can't do is move toward his opponent's goal line at the snap (besides the 5 yard rule if he's not a back when starting his motion). He can cartwheel, somersault, or cha-cha slide.
Can you point me to your rule reference for the resetting for 1 second before the snap while he's legally in motion?
Edit: Agree with Stinterp 100%.
Post by: OHref71 on August 23, 2018, 12:08:31 PM
Post by: VA Official on August 23, 2018, 12:15:09 PM
read case 7.2.6 situation b Following a huddle or a shift, all 11 players of A must come to a complete stop and must remain stationary simultaneously for at least one second before the snap or before a player goes in motion.
That deals with a shift of 2 or more players. This play we are discussing is 1 player in motion. 2 players is a shift and they must reset for 1 second, you are correct. But 1 player in motion doesn’t have to.
Post by: OHref71 on August 23, 2018, 12:19:20 PM
Post by: OHref71 on August 23, 2018, 12:21:57 PM
sounds like he shifted based on 2-39 definition and therefore must reset. I agree if he stayed in motion we are fine but he moved to a new position and set in 3 point stance this is a shift and he must be reset for 1 second.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 12:29:43 PM
read case 7.2.6 situation b Following a huddle or a shift, all 11 players of A must come to a complete stop and must remain stationary simultaneously for at least one second before the snap or before a player goes in motion.For those who asked, this is the basis of my position. When A stopped his motion and went into a 3 point stance, his “motion” became a shift. After that shift he must remain motionless for 1 second before the snap.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Stinterp on August 23, 2018, 03:05:50 PM
I think we are beating this dead horse, but what if the man in motion stops going in motion and just jogs in place or just stops and does nothing (we see this all the time), then the snap. I have nothing as long as he is not moving forward.
What is the difference if he is going down in a stance, this is not a shift it is legal motion.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 03:22:42 PM
Think about it like this: All A players break the huddle, get into formation and come set, fulfilling the requirement. Then the TE on the left side shifts over to the right side, and just as he is putting his hand down on the ground, the snapper snaps the ball. Would you call that an illegal shift?
Post by: brettjr2005 on August 23, 2018, 09:47:26 PM
All 11 players have to be set for 1 second at any time after the RFP until the snap, doesn't matter when they are all set.
I think we are beating this dead horse, but what if the man in motion stops going in motion and just jogs in place or just stops and does nothing (we see this all the time), then the snap. I have nothing as long as he is not moving forward.
What is the difference if he is going down in a stance, this is not a shift it is legal motion.
As long as that one man is taking short, choppy steps or jogging in place then he's still satisfying Art. 7 because his movement, however slight, still constitutes motion. Once he stops moving it is now classified as a shift and he must remain set for one second before the snap. Calhoun covered that part well.
As to your final sentence, Case Book Situation 2.39 (Illegal Shifts) clearly states that changes in stance, such as going into a three point stance from a standing position, constitute a shift.
Post by: Brian26 on August 24, 2018, 08:14:04 AM
IMO, if we consider A22 moving forward by going into a 3 point stance and flag that, it's going to be a long night. The rule states only 1 player MAY be in motion, he doesn't have to be moving side to side, as long as he is not moving forward, he is legal. Again, all 11 players have to be set for one second at some point before the snap, but one may be in motion. I'm interpreting that one man in motion can basically move anywhere he wants as long as its not forward. I'm not picking this booger.
I guess I stated that wrong. If he was originally set for one second then went into motion and as he turned towards opponents goal line to get into a 3 point stance and ball was snapped i would have illegal motion. If he gets into the 3 point stance before ball is snapped but doesn't stay motionless for one second then I would have illegal shift. It has to be a penalty on one or the other in my book. Calling should not make for a long night, it should make the QB be a little more aware of letting all his player get into legal position at the snap.
Although its a bit different and with the QB case play 7.2.7 is very similar in explanation of this.
Post by: VA Official on August 24, 2018, 10:40:12 AM
Think about it like this: All A players break the huddle, get into formation and come set, fulfilling the requirement. Then the TE on the left side shifts over to the right side, and just as he is putting his hand down on the ground, the snapper snaps the ball. Would you call that an illegal shift?
In this scenario it’s clearly established as illegal motion in the rules. A lineman in motion must be 5 yards back at the snap if he hasn’t stopped for 1 second in the backfield to establish himself as a back. This is explicit in the rules book so I agree this is a foul for illegal motion.
The other scenario, with a back in legal motion going into a set position, is not clearly defined either by a rule or a case play. I personally can’t call a foul for something that is so deep in the “gray” that there are 2 sides that both have valid points if it’s legal or a foul.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 24, 2018, 10:58:06 AM
"If a player on the offensive team moves to a new position after the ready and before the snap, it is a shift. There might be several shifts between the ready and the snap (breaking the huddle is a shift), but no matter how many there are, after the last shift all members of the offensive team must stop and remain still for at least one second. After this one-second pause, the ball may be snapped, or one player may go legally in motion and still be moving away from or parallel to his scrimmage line when the ball is snapped. The point is the shift must be separated from the rest of the action by the one-second pause. Otherwise it is an illegal shift (live ball foul) simultaneous with the snap."
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 24, 2018, 11:02:12 AM
EXAMPLE 3-7:
Team A has been set for one second when back A34, without committing a false start (a) goes in legal motion, or (b) steps forward to a new position on the line and takes a three-point stance. In either case, he stops, but before one second elapses, the ball is snapped.
RULING:
in (a), the snap is considered to have taken place while A34 is in legal motion. In (b), it is an illegal shift; A34 had to be stationary for a full second before the snap because his motion was forward.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 24, 2018, 11:04:00 AM
Post by: brettjr2005 on August 24, 2018, 11:06:41 AM
The other scenario, with a back in legal motion going into a set position, is not clearly defined either by a rule or a case play. I personally can’t call a foul for something that is so deep in the “gray” that there are 2 sides that both have valid points if it’s legal or a foul.
Do you not agree that 2.39 in the Case Book clearly defines the act of going into a (new) set position as a shift? It gives four different examples of different changes in stance, and includes actions by OL, QB, and RB, and in all situations states that such action constitutes a shift.
I really don't think this is a gray area. I think people get confused by basically merging Art. 6 and Art. 7 and deciding that as long as only one player is in motion then all action after that, including coming set, is clean; that is not what the rules state. The rules state that any player(s) moving from the huddle or a set position to a new set position is considered a shift. Anytime a shift occurs then everyone must be set for one second before the snap. Art. 7 really has nothing to do with Art. 6 because Art. 7 specifies that one player may be in motion. Once that motion ends and the player becomes set then Art. 7 no longer applies because the player is no longer in motion and by rule has performed a shift.
Post by: VA Official on August 24, 2018, 11:46:33 AM
There is also this example on page 10:
EXAMPLE 3-7:
Team A has been set for one second when back A34, without committing a false start (a) goes in legal motion, or (b) steps forward to a new position on the line and takes a three-point stance. In either case, he stops, but before one second elapses, the ball is snapped.
RULING:
in (a), the snap is considered to have taken place while A34 is in legal motion. In (b), it is an illegal shift; A34 had to be stationary for a full second before the snap because his motion was forward.
Perfect, thank you Calhoun. So if the player is in legal motion parallel to or away from the LOS and stops (either stops completely or gets into a set position) it is still legal motion and not a foul. If the player moves forward to another position and gets set, it is a foul (both plays assuming the player doesn't get set for 1 second before the snap). This is a solid interpretation.
Post by: VA Official on August 24, 2018, 11:57:37 AM
Do you not agree that 2.39 in the Case Book clearly defines the act of going into a (new) set position as a shift? It gives four different examples of different changes in stance, and includes actions by OL, QB, and RB, and in all situations states that such action constitutes a shift.
I really don't think this is a gray area. I think people get confused by basically merging Art. 6 and Art. 7 and deciding that as long as only one player is in motion then all action after that, including coming set, is clean; that is not what the rules state. The rules state that any player(s) moving from the huddle or a set position to a new set position is considered a shift. Anytime a shift occurs then everyone must be set for one second before the snap. Art. 7 really has nothing to do with Art. 6 because Art. 7 specifies that one player may be in motion. Once that motion ends and the player becomes set then Art. 7 no longer applies because the player is no longer in motion and by rule has performed a shift.
Motion is a type of shift, and it’s the only type of shift that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
See Redding’s interpretation in Calhoun’s post. It’s the exact scenario we are describing without having to pin multiple case plays and rules together to come up with a ruling.
Post by: FLAHL on August 24, 2018, 12:45:15 PM
I think you nailed this one. Your Redding’s examples are very helpful.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 24, 2018, 12:47:28 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: brettjr2005 on August 24, 2018, 03:27:07 PM
Motion is a type of shift, and it’s the only type of shift that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
See Redding’s interpretation in Calhoun’s post. It’s the exact scenario we are describing without having to pin multiple case plays and rules together to come up with a ruling.
Motion is not a type of shift and that's the whole point here and a source of confusion for too many officials. As his ruling says, in (a) it's legal motion, in (b) it's (a shift and therefore) an illegal shift because the snap occurs before one second elapses after he takes a new set position.
2.39 A shift is the action of one or more offensive players who, after a huddle or after taking set positions, move to a new set position before the ensuing snap.
7.2.7 Only one A player may be in motion at the snap...
Motion is: still occurring at the snap. A shift is: the act of assuming a new set position.
Also, notice that in the interpretation we are to "consider" it to have taken place "while in motion" even though the example is clear that he has stopped and the snap does not occur "while (he is) in motion." It doesn't flat out say that it's legal, but instead that we're going to "consider" it legal because the intent of the rule isn't being violated. This is a good interpretation because we're not going to nit pick a back or receiver who goes in motion and pauses before the snap, as long as he is basically in the same position he was in while he was in motion (ie, a crouched RB shuffling side to side in a crouched position, a WR who is upright). But once that motion player makes a drastic change in his stance (ie, going into a 3 or 4 point stance) then we're no longer going to "consider" him to be in motion and it is now a shift.
Also, as for your comment to Calhoun stating that the forward motion is the reason for it being a foul: I'm sorry for digging into the books again (although I think that's how we should learn and base our rulings), but the best example I can find is 7.2.7 COMMENT: If the quarterback drops his hands under the snapper without stepping forward, it is a shift and not motion then it references the definition of a shift and rule 7.2.6. This clarification makes it pretty clear that the action of "moving forward" has nothing to do with the ruling and that simply moving from one set position to another is a shift.
I'm not trying to nitpick (hopefully it doesn't feel that way and we're just discussing interpretations) and I feel we're pretty much on the same page for the ruling with this example but I think your interpretation of "moving forward" as well as saying motion is a shift aren't completely accurate and could mislead others reading this.
Post by: VA Official on August 24, 2018, 08:13:22 PM
Motion is a variant of a shift, and it’s the only variant that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
If you read Redding’s interpretation that our friend Calhoun showed us, he clearly stated it is a foul “because his motion was forward.” My summation is exactly what he said in his interpretation. If the player stops (whether it’s a hard stop or coming to a set 3 point stance) while he is in legal motion parallel or away from his LOS, he is still in motion and it is not a foul. It is a foul if he “moves forward” to a new position and doesn’t reset for 1 second. Don’t read too deep to make something that’s not there. Redding’s has simplified it into an interpretation that works and makes sense.
Again, this is Redding’s interpretation of “moving forward,” which seems to have a consensus so far, and motion is, for all intents and purposes, a form of a shift being that they are so intertwined. Luckily there was nothing misleading.
Post by: OHref71 on August 28, 2018, 07:01:31 AM
Post by: VA Official on August 28, 2018, 07:11:21 AM
The direction of the shift is irrelevant
With all due respect, that is contradictory to the Redding's interpretation above. It specifically mentions it is a foul because the player is moving forward, and that parallel or backward motion is legal and a player can stop and become set (3 point stance or not) without a 1 second pause as long as he doesn't do so moving forward. You are free to your own individual interpretation though just as anyone else is. Redding's is, after all, just a guide. I just trust it because it makes the most sense to me in this situation and it gives some credibility to have Redding's back you up.
Post by: OHref71 on August 28, 2018, 09:13:15 AM
Motion is a type of shift, and it’s the only type of shift that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
Motion is not a type of shift. In definitions Shift is a player who moves from one set position to another set position. A player can go in motion and stay in motion until the snap so by definition it cannot be a shift.
Post by: VA Official on August 28, 2018, 09:42:02 AM
Motion is a type of shift, and it’s the only type of shift that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
Motion is not a type of shift. In definitions Shift is a player who moves from one set position to another set position. A player can go in motion and stay in motion until the snap so by definition it cannot be a shift.
IMHO, taking an overly technical standpoint on the verbiage or the way a rule is written ends up hurting you more often than it helps you. You begin to overanalyze every minute detail and miss what it was designed to be.
Motion is a variant of a shift, and it’s the only variant that is legal to be occurring at the snap.
...
Motion is, for all intents and purposes, a form of a shift being that they are so intertwined.
Also as discussed in Redding's interpretation, you can continue to be legally "in motion" when stopping in a new set position as long as it is not forward.
Post by: Badger1 on August 28, 2018, 11:29:22 AM
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 28, 2018, 11:37:35 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk