Trick play touchdown for Florida against Michigan

[bossman72]

Forgetting for discussion that this is an illegal shift IMO, if a WR simply went in motion "legally" and was moving legally would we let it go if as he approached the QB in shotgun and start yelling at him and waving his arms?  Where do we draw the line about overt actions intended to indicate that they are changing the play call thereby implying that the snap is not imminent vs. "normal" man in motion?

Can you give me an NCAA rule or case book play that says he can't do this?  The only one close is the one that has the kicking shoe being thrown onto the field, but that is using equipment to deceive.

[Johnponz]

I believe without the ILS this is a legal play in NCAA.  that being said the person gesturing better not be moving forward at the snap.  Additionally, I think without the ILS this action does not look as confusing as it did with the ILS.  With the QB and the other player moving at the same time the confusion was multiplied, and the play just looked wrong for a lack of a better word.

[NVFOA_Ump]

We've always been instructed that a man in motion must either stop and reset or continue in motion in a manner that is smooth and continuous without actions that would simulate the start of the play.  IMO in this case we have neither smooth or continuous motion and additionally we have intentional movement combined with apparent verbal play calling that is clearly intended to make it appear to the defense that the snap is not imminent. IMO this does not follow the direction that we're given every year to officiate "trick" plays to the strict letter of the rules with no leeway.

I do expect that we'll get some clear direction on this type of play, probably with this video as the play example, clarifying for us what is legal vs. illegal, prior to the 2016 season.

[scrounge]

I wrote this case play as a member of the Editorial Committee back in 2001. My intent was to outlaw plays such as this and refrained from publishing a laundry list of illegal acts as if you list 100 a creative coach will come up with #101. IMHO, the brakes should be put on this play in pregame when explained by the coach.

While I deeply respect the 'original intent' in this , I still think the black-letter of the rule and, indeed, the case play at worst make it ambiguous about this play but to me, make this play still legal.

The rule and case mention two elements required (both of which needed, since it says 'AND'): the snap not being imminent AND that there's a problem. Without another clarifying case or two, it's left up to each official what constitutes a 'problem'. Clearly, something up with the ball (the 'wrong ball' play) or missing a tee or something wrong with the clock would be a problem. But is the QB turning to the WR and yelling 'OMAHA' a problem? While that may or may not indicate the snap is not imminent, nothing in the case would indicate that normal football signals constitute a problem.

To me, without some further clarification or cases to further define what's a problem, that seems like normal football operations and thus a legal play.

As a thought experiment, let's just slightly tweak this play. Let's say QB is barking signals in a short shotgun/pistol formation. Single tailback behind him in a 2 point stance, standing up. QB stops yelling for a sec, then jogs out to the right in motion. Very quickly afterwards, ball is snapped to TB, who fakes a dive and throws to QB on an out route. Except for the QB yelling out a signal to the WR, this is nearly the same as this play. Is the yelling out of signals as the sole difference enough to say there's a problem? Not to me.