Author Topic: Ineligible Receivers  (Read 25907 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #25 on: August 30, 2013, 12:34:35 PM »
Wideout comes out, lines up, and asks LJ, "Am I good?"

"I don't know, I've never seen you play."

Online bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 3153
  • FAN REACTION: +124/-29
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #26 on: August 30, 2013, 01:30:50 PM »
I learned that I can't ask them if they're on or off, because I can't tell whether a 17-old with a mouthpiece in his mouth is saying "on" or "off." 

This.       yEs:  yEs:  yEs:

vplacek228@comcast.net

  • Guest
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #27 on: August 30, 2013, 02:04:52 PM »
I think the part about the TE having his hand on the ground is referring to his ability to shift. If he is covered and has his hand on or near ground he can't come out of this stance unless the teammate covering him up shifts off line first (uncovering him).  And yes this is the same rule for any interior lineman as that is what he is when he is covered.

Offline VALJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2465
  • FAN REACTION: +95/-15
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #28 on: August 30, 2013, 03:22:16 PM »
Wideout comes out, lines up, and asks LJ, "Am I good?"

"I don't know, I've never seen you play."

I have SO wanted to use that...  "Well, 88, I don't know how good you are yet, but you're on the line."

Offline Rulesman

  • Past Keeper of the Keys
  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +65535/-2
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2013, 05:33:48 PM »
By the way, a man being on the line of scrimmage does not take away his ability to shift... 
That is not always a true statement.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

BuckTrump

  • Guest
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2013, 07:08:07 PM »
That is not always a true statement.


Could you kindly give me an example where it would be illegal for a man on the LOS to shift. 

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2013, 07:38:52 PM »

Could you kindly give me an example where it would be illegal for a man on the LOS to shift.

TE has his hand on the ground.  He is covered up by a wide receiver.  If the TE shifts from this position, it is a false start.

Offline Rulesman

  • Past Keeper of the Keys
  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +65535/-2
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2013, 09:16:43 PM »
TE has his hand on the ground.  He is covered up by a wide receiver.  If the TE shifts from this position, it is a false start.
Thanks, AB. You beat me to it. BuckTrump, see rule 7-1-7c.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 5044
  • FAN REACTION: +874/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #33 on: September 03, 2013, 11:11:21 AM »
I agree fully with JG-ME suggestions. We Mainers have an ole' saying : "Don't look for fly poop in the pepper shaker". A mechanic we use if a eligible -numbered reciever is covered is for the covering wing official to tap the top of his head. This will alert his crewmates to be alert if he goes downfield and a pass is thrown.

110

  • Guest
Re: Ineligible Receivers
« Reply #34 on: September 07, 2013, 08:21:54 AM »
But I 'll also tell them "I have you ON or I have you OFF,  particularly if they are pointing at me looking for and answer. 


As an aside, I try to use "I see you ON" or "I have you as ON" but counter with the alternate, "I see you OFF the line," or "I have you as OFF the line," because the cadence of the extra two words may help the receiver detect the difference. I mean, we're dealing with a kid who is trying to remember the snap count and the route he's got to run, while also dealing with the other two predominant thoughts dominating a teenage boy's mind: food and females, so the best he's going to hear is "something something something something"; whereas, maybe "something something something something something else," might trigger a moment of thought.

For rookies: avoid the phrase "you're good." Because you have no clue if the guy is where he is supposed to be for the formation being called.

At lower levels of ball, I'd not have a problem with an official saying to an off-the-line WR, "hey, I need an end here..." to a player. Preventative officiating.