RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => General Discussion => Topic started by: comicref on November 08, 2010, 10:10:12 AM
-
Looks like an illegal snap to me (ball didn't leave snapper's hand immediately). I wonder if the coach ever mentioned this play to the crew before the game to ensure its legality.
[yt=425,350]0UIdI8khMkw[/yt]
-
Obviously not using Fed rules or there would have been flags.
-
Can't hear what the coach is saying but this smells like the "wrong ball!" play, which is illegal in NCAA.
-
2-23-1-e Unless moved in a backward direction, the movement of the ball does
not start a legal snap. It is not a legal snap if the ball is first moved
forward or lifted.
2-23-1-g The snap need not be between the snapper’s legs; but to be legal, it must
be a quick and continuous backward motion.
-
Maybe we have someone from Corpus Christi on here who can add a little more imput to this play?
-
Found this for a little more insight:
Down 6-0 with one minute to go in the third quarter of their championship game against rival Wynn Seale Saturday, the Corpus Christi middle school coaching staff pulled off a master deception. And it could only be unleashed after getting flagged for a penalty, Driscoll Rangers coach Art Rodriguez told the Daily News.
"They marked out five yards, but then [Eighth-grade quarterback Jason Garza] tells the center they're marking out five more yards," says Rodriguez.
Garza then told the center to give him the ball - technically hiking it to start the play - and pretended to mark off the additional yardage. Once he was clear of the defensive line, Garza made a break for the end zone. The 6-6 score after the missed extra point was the game's final.
"This is first time we ever tried it," says Rodriguez of the Penalty Play drawn up by assistant coach John Delosantos. "And it worked."
-
NFHS has clearly stated this kind of play is unsportsmanlike conduct because it uses verbiage to make the defense believe the snap is not imminent. Just once, I'd like to see video of a team trying something like this and the quarterback getting creamed as the linesman provide no protection. It might put a stop to these assistant coaches who think they're football geniuses.
-
Illegal under NCAA rules. Using equipment to confuse. Same as the "wrong ball" play.
-
Illegal under NCAA rules. Using equipment to confuse. Same as the "wrong ball" play.
Beyond that, it was an illegal snap. It should have been dead immediately. Good job Corpus boys! Maybe that's why they want to be UIL so bad. They really seem to know the rules.
-
The snap was borderline. I assume you are saying illegal as there was a very slight hesitation in the release of the ball? In games at this level such snaps are routinely allowed when they are between the legs.
-
Illegal because it's upward, and not backward.
-
It never moves forward, so that is not a problem. A snap would be legal if the snapper just threw it backward over his shoulder. The only problem with this snap is the slight hesitation before the QB picks it out of the snappers's hand.
You would not call that with a "regular" snap, but on trick plays I use to be extra sharp to prohibit legitimate complaints by the "tricked" team. Under NCAA rules, this play would be legal if the release of the ball was immediate.
Since there is verbal communication before the snap, illegal all the way under Fed rules AFAIK.
-
Under NCAA rules, this play would be legal if the release of the ball was immediate.
I'd call this as using equipment (the ball) to deceive the defense into thinking that there will be no snap.
-
I'd call this as using equipment (the ball) to deceive the defense into thinking that there will be no snap.
Is the ball "equipment"? The ball is dealt with in 1-3, player's equipment in 1-4.
What (NCAA) rule and A.R. would you reference in your pregame talk with the coach when you want to tell him this play is illegal?
-
What (NCAA) rule and A.R. would you reference in your pregame talk with the coach when you want to tell him this play is illegal?
JA and RR have both very consistently ruled that any verbiage that fools the defense into thinking that the snap is not imminent is illegal. That consistency is the basis for my ruling.
I know this is not written in the rules, but I feel that it is a valid interpretation of the existing rules, A.R's and other rulings. This is similar to the QB walking towards a receiver yelling "move wider" and the ball being snapped to a RB, which I think has been ruled illegal.
-
From Redding's Guide:
"Actions or verbiage designed to confue the defense into believing the snap is not imminent, are not legal. This includes pretending to have a problem with the play that has been called, an equipment problem with a shoe, the ball, etc. and feigning an injury. A good rule of thumb to follow is that if an act appears to be unfair, it is probably contyrary to the rules."
-
From Redding's Guide:
"Actions or verbiage designed to confue the defense into believing the snap is not imminent, are not legal. This includes pretending to have a problem with the play that has been called, an equipment problem with a shoe, the ball, etc. and feigning an injury. A good rule of thumb to follow is that if an act appears to be unfair, it is probably contyrary to the rules."
Based on that the attempted fake field goal in the UT Kansas State game would be illegal....
-
What happened?
-
2-23-1-e Unless moved in a backward direction, the movement of the ball does
not start a legal snap. It is not a legal snap if the ball is first moved
forward or lifted.
This ball is first lifted. Illegal snap. Too bad this play is getting all of this media attention. Now we're going to have to deal with "copy cat" coaches trying plays like this in their games because they saw it on TV.
-
I have a hypothetical for y'all. Let's remove the verbiage and run this play silently. QB comes up behind center. Center hands him the ball over the shoulder, as shown. Defenders hesitate because they're young and inexperienced and it looks odd. QB takes off for a long gain.
I'm not seeing any issue that makes it inherently illegal; certainly the snap itself seems to me to be as backward as it is upward...
-
Agree
-
I'm not seeing any issue that makes it inherently illegal; certainly the snap itself seems to me to be as backward as it is upward...
Yup, I'm fine with the snap, given the level of the play.
-
I have a hypothetical for y'all. Let's remove the verbiage and run this play silently. QB comes up behind center. Center hands him the ball over the shoulder, as shown. Defenders hesitate because they're young and inexperienced and it looks odd. QB takes off for a long gain.
I'm not seeing any issue that makes it inherently illegal; certainly the snap itself seems to me to be as backward as it is upward...
Please, don't start down the "hypothetical" road this type play leads to, there's only grief at the end of it. This is not a place to split hairs down to the gnat's eyelash level. This type of play is like a bucket without a bottom. Of the sane choices available, illegal snap is the cleanest. Save UNC for if someone is dumb enough to try it a second time, after being
-
This play and players involved are on FoxNews as we speak.
-
Yep and listening to the coach proves why this should be 15 and not 5. He was heavily involved in this BS. (and the snap wasn't all that bad anyway)
-
This play and players involved are on FoxNews as we speak.
So why hasn't anyone brought up with the perps that the play was illegal both in Fed AND NCAA rules?
-
Seems like an illegal snap to me. Additionally, it seems that the QB is actually on the line, since he is breaking the plane of the line. So I would argue that it is an illegal snap.
From the NCAA Rulebook:
One player may be between his scrimmage line and the backs if in a
position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s
legs. When in such position, that player may receive the snap himself
or it may go directly to any player legally a back [S19].
The QB is on the line when he recieves the snap. Additionally, he was in motion. The crew blew this one. So if you want the snap to be legal, I'm coming at you with an illegal formation or an illegal shift. In reality however, it is an illegal snap because it was not to a back or is legal per the QB exception.
-
Additionally, let's not forget "An obviously unfair act not specifically covered by the rules occurs
during the game (A.R. 4-2-1-II)." USC all day long. I would like to thank that crew for the headache that I will get next fall because some coach is going to freak when I ring his team up for the same behavior. I can hear it already -- "you didn't see that on youtube?"
-
VALinesman: This play is covered by the rules, in all its aspects, so you cannot invoke the "god clause".
(NCAA rules base)
Good pickup on the QB being a lineman. His head breaks the plane through the waistline of the snapper, so he is a legal ineligible on the line. Therefore he may not receive a hand-to-hand snap, live-ball foul (S19). (Not an illegal snap).
I still hold it that the snap would be legal without the stop before the QB takes it. That the ball is lifted off the ground is not a foul in itself when that lifting is part of a continous backward motion that ends with the ball leaving the snapper's hands. As I said, if the snapper simply throws the ball over his shoulder, it is a legal snap if the ball does not move forward anytime during the throwing motion.
-
You can argue all day and split hairs whether it was a legal snap or not, if the QB was actually on the line, etc. The problem I have with this play is this....as a defensive player, you are taught (or should be taught) to fire at the movement or snap of the ball, and go after whoever has the ball! Now...something kept them from doing that, and that something was a VERBAL command of the QB to "hand me the ball, I have to mark off 5 more yards!". That is deception. You can call it the God clause if you want to, but it is no different than a defensive player saying "hike" to simulate a call by the QB. We flag that as USC and we should flag this too. Heck, what business does the QB have "marking off" a penalty anyway? We would not let him do this under any other circumstances.
We are talking about a middle school game here guys. If this had occured in a college or NFL game, then so be it...but this is middle school. Obviously the defense thought there was no play, no chance of a play. The coach and the kid used the officials in their little deception play, and that is wrong in my book also. Shut it down. Shut it down....SHUT IT DOWN!!! And if the coach told the crew before the game, then shame on them for letting him use them to cheat 8th graders out of a fair game.
Come on coaches....line up and play football and quit using these idiotic "trick" plays to build your ego.
-
The reason the NCAA rule book is so big and with so many Approved Rulings is due to Texas High School football coaches trying to get "creative". Anyway you look at it whether it be from a deception or illegal snap standpoint, this play is illegal.
I would not doubt that there will be an AR in the rule book about it.
-
Shut it down. Shut it down....SHUT IT DOWN!!! And if the coach told the crew before the game, then shame on them for letting him use them to cheat 8th graders out of a fair game.
Come on coaches....line up and play football and quit using these idiotic "trick" plays to build your ego.
(Nodski.)
I swear, every year some coach comes and tells us about some odd new play he's gonna run. And then we start asking questions ... and it ain't legal. Hell, I had some guy ask me if he could run the missing tee play.
(Really? For real? Smack me in the head with a crate of hammers .... )
-
VALinesman: This play is covered by the rules, in all its aspects, so you cannot invoke the "god clause".
(NCAA rules base)
Good pickup on the QB being a lineman. His head breaks the plane through the waistline of the snapper, so he is a legal ineligible on the line. Therefore he may not receive a hand-to-hand snap, live-ball foul (S19). (Not an illegal snap).
I still hold it that the snap would be legal without the stop before the QB takes it. That the ball is lifted off the ground is not a foul in itself when that lifting is part of a continous backward motion that ends with the ball leaving the snapper's hands. As I said, if the snapper simply throws the ball over his shoulder, it is a legal snap if the ball does not move forward anytime during the throwing motion.
"God Clause" -- NICE! I'm gonna have to remember that one! I'm a NFHS guy, so I had to do some reading on that one (like I don't have anything better to do in my 3L year of law school...LOL), but I did find it interesting that the snap would've been legal if the QB was not on the line. I already packed up my NFHS rulebook, so I will have to check that out over Xmas...
-
I once told a player during a nice talk we had after a game that we as officials are condemned to be God for the two-and-a-half hours of the game, but that we lack His omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence.
And that we don't have the luxury of the players that, if we perform bad, the coach can send in a backup.
He just nodded knowingly. Maybe I made it a little bit easier for the officials in his next game.
-
Shut it down. Shut it down....SHUT IT DOWN!!!
This is the only correct response.
-
Dotson Lewis, one of the best rules men in Texas has weighed in one the play and effectively eliminated any need to even get into the "deception" part of the issue. Not sure any of us even picked up on his 3d issue. His take:
False start by the left guard, moving his hand. Dead ball foul.
Illegal snap, the snapper stopped the motion of the ball and the lineman took it from him. Dead ball foul.
Ball was snapped to a lineman. Live ball foul.
-
Pretty much if Dotson says it...........................end of discussion.
Kinda like a coach trying to argue penalty enforcement with Charles Stephenson, he ain't gonna win.
-
Heh, we all missed a false start. That probably was it for those playoff games :)
-
Not sure that was a false start by Left G. Just looks like he was going down for his initial 3 point stance. Anyway, still say give them the 15 yd UNS and be done.
This whole situation was actually on The Ticket in Dallas yesterday morning and they were all assuming that it was legal since it wasn't flagged, and was comparing to other "deception" acts like Dan Marino's fake spike, etc.
-
Dotson Lewis, one of the best rules men in Texas has weighed in one the play and effectively eliminated any need to even get into the "deception" part of the issue. Not sure any of us even picked up on his 3d issue. His take:
False start by the left guard, moving his hand. Dead ball foul.
Illegal snap, the snapper stopped the motion of the ball and the lineman took it from him. Dead ball foul.
Ball was snapped to a lineman. Live ball foul.
None of this should matter, because it's USC as soon as the quarterback says, "They're marking off another five yards!" Shut it down, administer 15. End of discussion. No other answer is correct.
-
What is the support to make this a dead ball foul as opposed to live ball. Couldn't they "buy their way out" by calling a timeout after the official using preventive officiating tells him it will be flagged if the ball is snapped?
-
What is the support to make this a dead ball foul as opposed to live ball. Couldn't they "buy their way out" by calling a timeout after the official using preventive officiating tells him it will be flagged if the ball is snapped?
We in the NCAA have it easy. Unfair tactics is a previous spot (live ball) foul, so we can simply let this play be run, flag it, and then potentially let the defense decline the penalty.
To those advocating calling this an illegal snap to a lineman, do you flag it when the QB leans over the center so that the crown of his head is above the waist of the center? He is technically a lineman, but I'd bet every supervisor in the world would rise hell with that interpretation.
-
Problem here is the QB is not hehind the snapper to take the hand to hand snap BETWEEN the legs. Qb is between lg and center
-
What is the support to make this a dead ball foul as opposed to live ball. Couldn't they "buy their way out" by calling a timeout after the official using preventive officiating tells him it will be flagged if the ball is snapped?
I'm good with that. I was just thinking once they started it, shut it down, but I can see that they may just fumble or do something else that may benefit the other team. So, let them play, then penalize them 15.
-
Problem here is the QB is not hehind the snapper to take the hand to hand snap BETWEEN the legs. Qb is between lg and center
My eyesight must be going. I see him standing behind the center, even though he receives the snap from above the center's shoulder. Calling that a snap to a lineman is still too technical to me (his hands aren't down so yes, he couldn't receive a hand to hand snap from below), even when we are talking about a trick play, where we can (and should) be more technical than usual.
EDIT: I think I take this back. As the usual way of a hand-to-hand snap is defined as being between the legs, then, in a trick play such as this, requiring the QB to be able to receive such a snap is valid - thus, illegal snap to a lineman among other fouls.
-
None of this should matter, because it's USC as soon as the quarterback says, "They're marking off another five yards!" Shut it down, administer 15. End of discussion. No other answer is correct.
It would seem the most important thing is recognizing this is a BS play, and must not stand. Recognizing this is a "Middle School" play, there may be some discretion available as to how to insure this play doesn't stand. Keeping in mind the overarching significance of NF: 1-1-6, whicj defines the ultimate decision process, "The referee has authority to rule promptly, and in the spirit of good spotsmanship, on any situation not specifically covered in the rules. The referee's decisions are final in all matters pertaining to the game."
Our job is a lot easier when things are clearly spelled out for us. Unfortunately, the nature of the game is that people are always going to be trying to push the envelope, and sometimes push too hard or too far. We have been charged with the authority, and responsibility, to judge what is too hard or too far and are expected to what's "right". How we get get to where we need to be seems not as important as the fact we get there, and BS plays simply should not be allowed to stand.
-
USA Football weighs in:
http://www.usafootball.com/articles/displayArticle/7737/10812
Misleading techniques at youth level should not include ‘wrong ball’ tactics
Bill LeMonnier is a longtime college football referee and USA Football Rules Committee editor.
A youth football video that has gone viral and aired on ESPN would not be a legal play under USA Football rules.
In fact, USA Football Rules Committee editor and longtime college official Bill LeMonnier said, plays such as this one have no place in the game.
The video shows the center snapping the football over his shoulder to a quarterback, who walks through the defense before taking off toward the end zone. The deception comes in that the quarterback and his coach are arguing the spot of the ball even as the quarterback walks past defenders.
USA Football prohibits plays that are designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and the snap isn't imminent. The penalty is unsportsmanlike conduct and a 15-yard, basic spot foul as found on pages 172-73 of the rule book.
LeMonnier said beyond being illegal, the play undermines the core of what should be taught to players.
"We're trying to teach young people about the game of football -- about respect for the game, respect for opponents," LeMonnier said. "Plays such as this one are demeaning to your opponents and show a lack of respect."
LeMonnier said the snap was legal in that the ball was transferred in one fluid motion. Linemen were set and in place when action began.
It's the verbal deception that crosses the line, and it sends the wrong message to children.
"As adults, you are not only teaching kids the Xs and Os, but they also watch you every day," LeMonnier said. "You don't realize the important things these kids see you do and what they pick up. Plays and approaches like this are not the things we want emulated. Coaches should teach players how to do things right rather than glorifying these plays."
Trickery is a part of football, LeMonnier said, as long as it comes within the play itself. Whether running a reverse, bootleg or flea flicker, teams often employ natural forms of deception.
"It's about fooling your opponent," LeMonnier said. "But taking the ball from center and saying there should be 5 more yards of a penalty or saying you've got the wrong ball then taking off or hiding a player near the sideline ... those aren't football plays."
The following language appears in the current USA Football Rulebook. For more about USA Football policy toward unfair acts, see the PDF attached to this story.
It is a fundamental core belief of USA Football that coaches demand sportsmanship from their players and, equally important, lead by example. Coaches must always remember that the players look to them for positive life skills and values.
With that in mind, USA Football takes the position that coaches should refrain from teaching their players and teams techniques and plays that have no place in youth sports. Examples of deceptive plays include but are not limited to "hideout" plays or "wrong ball" plays.
Strategic deception has been and always will be part of football, such as multiple shifts, unusual formations and creative plays. However, actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap isn't imminent, or planned loose ball plays, are beyond the scope of sportsmanship and are illegal. Respect your opponent. Respect the game.
-
My eyesight must be going. I see him standing behind the center, even though he receives the snap from above the center's shoulder. Calling that a snap to a lineman is still too technical to me (his hands aren't down so yes, he couldn't receive a hand to hand snap from below), even when we are talking about a trick play, where we can (and should) be more technical than usual.
EDIT: I think I take this back. As the usual way of a hand-to-hand snap is defined as being between the legs, then, in a trick play such as this, requiring the QB to be able to receive such a snap is valid - thus, illegal snap to a lineman among other fouls.
In my opinion, trick plays must be 100% legal. So yes, I will be technical on a trick play.
-
It would seem the most important thing is recognizing this is a BS play, and must not stand. Recognizing this is a "Middle School" play, there may be some discretion available as to how to insure this play doesn't stand. Keeping in mind the overarching significance of NF: 1-1-6, whicj defines the ultimate decision process, "The referee has authority to rule promptly, and in the spirit of good spotsmanship, on any situation not specifically covered in the rules. The referee's decisions are final in all matters pertaining to the game."
Our job is a lot easier when things are clearly spelled out for us. Unfortunately, the nature of the game is that people are always going to be trying to push the envelope, and sometimes push too hard or too far. We have been charged with the authority, and responsibility, to judge what is too hard or too far and are expected to what's "right". How we get get to where we need to be seems not as important as the fact we get there, and BS plays simply should not be allowed to stand.
Thank you. Good explanation. That is what I was trying to explain in my post. What gets me, and somebody correct me if I am wrong, but the District or some sort of championship had come down to these two teams. Whoever won the game, won the title. That was the winning TD. Has anyone else heard this? See, that is what makes me so upset at the coach. If it had been upper level, then so be it. But he cheated another group of middle schoolers out of their legit chance of winning. Win at all cost. Geesh.
-
"USA Football prohibits..."
Um, sorry to say this, but who cares what USA Football prohibits? They don't write the rules the last time I checked. Are they a youth football organization?
-
Call me crazy, but to me a game of football is both a physical and an intellectual game. These "no, we're not about to run a play" types of tricks fail the physical aspect, thus they have no place in the game, IMO - and until my supervisor (or RR) says otherwise I will be flagging each and every attempt of the kind.
If you want a purely intellectual game of deception, take up chess.
-
Or if you want both, take up chess-boxing. No, I'm not kidding, it's for real.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_boxing
-
We in the NCAA have it easy. Unfair tactics is a previous spot (live ball) foul, so we can simply let this play be run, flag it, and then potentially let the defense decline the penalty.
To those advocating calling this an illegal snap to a lineman, do you flag it when the QB leans over the center so that the crown of his head is above the waist of the center? He is technically a lineman, but I'd bet every supervisor in the world would rise hell with that interpretation.
No, because the rules address that issue. It is an exception because the player is able to receive a direct snap from between the center's legs or to a back.
-
No, because the rules address that issue. It is an exception because the player is able to receive a direct snap from between the center's legs or to a back.
In this case, the was not received between the center's legs.
-
The snap was illegal, but was also a live ball, previous spot foul.
-
You guys are being WAY too technical on this. I don't care if it was the most beautiful, legal snap in the history of South Texas football, or if the QB was exactly 3 mm in his backfield. All I need, if I was the Umpire standing there looking at him, was to here the little QB say "Center, hand me the ball, I (or they, doesn't matter) need to mark off more yards".....I am on my Fox40 so quick and loud that his ears would still be ringing. I ain't letting it get started! 5 yards for a false start on the center at least, and maybe 15 for USC because it was a VERBAL from the QB that was intended to deceive.
That is why I must believe the crew was in on it from the start...and that's a shame.
-
You guys are being WAY too technical on this. I don't care if it was the most beautiful, legal snap in the history of South Texas football, or if the QB was exactly 3 mm in his backfield. All I need, if I was the Umpire standing there looking at him, was to here the little QB say "Center, hand me the ball, I (or they, doesn't matter) need to mark off more yards".....I am on my Fox40 so quick and loud that his ears would still be ringing. I ain't letting it get started! 5 yards for a false start on the center at least, and maybe 15 for USC because it was a VERBAL from the QB that was intended to deceive.
That is why I must believe the crew was in on it from the start...and that's a shame.
I am with you too. I have stopped similar plays as soon as they started --live ball foul or not. I will not let them run an illegal play. I was just pointing out that the illegal snap was live ball just in case someone tries to snap the ball that way on an otherwise legal play.
-
In this case, the was not received between the center's legs.
My point exactly.
-
You guys are being WAY too technical on this. I don't care if it was the most beautiful, legal snap in the history of South Texas football, or if the QB was exactly 3 mm in his backfield. All I need, if I was the Umpire standing there looking at him, was to here the little QB say "Center, hand me the ball, I (or they, doesn't matter) need to mark off more yards".....I am on my Fox40 so quick and loud that his ears would still be ringing. I ain't letting it get started! 5 yards for a false start on the center at least, and maybe 15 for USC because it was a VERBAL from the QB that was intended to deceive.
That is why I must believe the crew was in on it from the start...and that's a shame.
I agree with you, but it is nice to be able to back actions up with the rulebook.
-
I agree with you, but it is nice to be able to back actions up with the rulebook.
VA....it's in there:
9-9-5: Neither team shall commit any act which, in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game.
-
VA....it's in there:
9-9-5: Neither team shall commit any act which, in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game.
The key point in the above rule (NF: 9-9-5) is the specification, "in the opinion of the referee", which is the same emphasis provided by NF: 1-6-8 "The referee has authority to rule promptly, and in the spirit of good sportsmanship, on any situation not covered in the rules. The referee's decisions are final in all matters pertaining to the game".
This precisely targeted designation of authority is intentional and deliberate.
-
VA....it's in there:
9-9-5: Neither team shall commit any act which, in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game.
Oh, I am with you, but that is a federation rule, and in my mind, it is the "where's the tee" play referenced in the NF casebook. In that case, kill it, USC on head coach, 15 yards.
I am not too familiar with NCAA rules, but I did flip through them to answer arguments defending this particular play. Even without the "God Clause" (YES, GOT TO USE IT), a flag should have been thrown on this play.
-
Even without the "God Clause" (YES, GOT TO USE IT), a flag should have been thrown on this play.
We've had enough of these verbal deceptions in the past decade to warrant a specific rule being created rather than relying on the "God Clause".