Shift / Motion - legal or not?

[CalhounLJ]

In the next paragraph, Redding states, "In the preceding example, when the motion is legal as in (a), the player is considered to be in motion at the snap. (NFHS 2002 interp, Sit. 8). If the player moves forward to a new position, the one-second requirement must be met.

[brettjr2005]

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.

[VA Official]

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.

[VA Official]

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.

[FLAHL]

+1 Calhoun

I think you nailed this one. Your Redding’s examples are very helpful.

[CalhounLJ]

The Redding Study Guide is extremely helpful to me. It’s a solid supplementary resource.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brettjr2005]

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.

[VA Official]

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.

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.

[OHref71]

I agree B is a foul but it would also be a foul if he was on the line and stepped back to be off and was not set for one second when he got to his new position off the line of scrimmage.  It is not a foul because he stepped forward it is a foul because after the shift he was not set for 1 second before the snap.  The direction of the shift is irrelevant it is just that he must be set 1 second after completing his shift.

[VA Official]

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.

[OHref71]

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.

[VA Official]

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.

[Badger1]

I get the Redding's Study Guide every year and value it probably more than any other NFHS Rulebook put out.  The problem I see is there are probably no coaches that are going to subscribe to the Redding's Study Guide, much less have ever heard of it, and most coaches don't take the time to go in depth with the NFHS Rulebook.  I am not saying that this is illegal, but as an official you approach the coach on this matter and start saying that per Redding's interpretation it is legal, he is going to argue Redding's is not an official rule book and will want you to point it out in his NFHS Rulebook if he actually has a copy of it with him.  Just my 2 cents worth.

[CalhounLJ]

Honestly I don’t think that would happen in real life. If a coach approached me about this issue I would say something short and sweet like “coach, by rule, if he’s not set, he’s in motion,” and let it go at that. OR, if I did throw a flag I would say, “Coach, by rule a player shifting has to be set for 1 second before the snap. Your guy wasn’t.”  I’m not going to quote every source that informed my interpretation of the rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk