RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => National Football League => Topic started by: KB on October 14, 2010, 03:05:47 AM

Title: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: KB on October 14, 2010, 03:05:47 AM
Is the QB not a player eligible to touch/catch a forward pass in NFL rules?

The Vikings ran a trick play where, during a double reverse, Brett Favre did not block the corner (as he usually does), but went downfield and caught a pass from Moss for a 1st down.

Favre was flagged for ineligible downfield.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: JugglingReferee on October 14, 2010, 04:37:29 AM
NFL rule 8.1.6 states that for a snap receiver to be eligible, he must not be under centre when receiving the snap.

Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: KB on October 14, 2010, 04:47:44 AM
So a highly paid OC or HC did not check the legality of his trick play before implementing it?
Why am I not surprised?

BTW the play was a charm. My alarm bells went off when Favre ducked the chance to deliver a block. He never misses a chance to block for his guy on a reverse :)
Really should have earned that 1st down.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: JugglingReferee on October 14, 2010, 05:02:28 AM
I'm Canadian, and I just don't understand all the rules that the US codes have in place to restrict movement, etc.

In our game, backs can be moving towards the LS, the QB is always eligible, etc.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: APG on October 14, 2010, 06:51:21 AM
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 6

(e) A player who takes his stance behind center as a T-formation quarterback is not an eligible receiver unless, before the ball is snapped, he legally moves to a position at least one yard behind the line of scrimmage or on the end of the line, and is stationary in that position for at least one second before the snap

Note: If he leaves his position behind the center and does not receive the snap, it is a false start unless he has been stationary for at least one second.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: Roscoe on October 25, 2011, 04:33:43 AM
In our game, backs can be moving towards the LS, the QB is always eligible, etc.

I feel letting the backs run toward the line of scrimmage right before the snap gives them a momentum advantage over the defense.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: JugglingReferee on October 25, 2011, 04:36:17 AM
I feel letting the backs run toward the line of scrimmage right before the snap gives them a momentum advantage over the defense.

Good to know.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: Welpe on October 25, 2011, 10:30:04 AM
I'm Canadian, and I just don't understand all the rules that the US codes have in place to restrict movement, etc.

And a lot of us don't understand why you let them run all over the place.  Or why you have a larger field, only three downs and no fair catches.   ;)
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: 110 on October 25, 2011, 11:26:14 AM
And a lot of us don't understand why you let them run all over the place.  Or why you have a larger field, only three downs and no fair catches.   ;)

You forgot the rouge.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: mbyron on October 25, 2011, 11:29:19 AM
You forgot the rouge.
Like lipstick, you can't put rouge on a pig.  ;D
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: Welpe on October 25, 2011, 11:32:48 AM
You forgot the rouge.

I didn't forget it, just chose not to include it.  There's only so much I can do to understand that strange game that is played north of the border.
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: Roscoe on September 27, 2012, 08:47:13 AM
You forgot the rouge.

I just educated myself and watched a few videos on the rouge. And all I have to say is  hEaDbAnG
Title: Re: Ineligible downfield (Vikings)
Post by: James on September 28, 2012, 01:31:44 AM
I remember loosing a a High School semi-final 0-1 because of a rouge. Very disappointing.