Author Topic: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?  (Read 6545 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TxJim

  • *
  • Posts: 454
  • FAN REACTION: +18/-22
SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« on: December 04, 2010, 03:34:07 PM »
1st and 10 on B-14.  Ball is snapped to A23 directly from crouching position besides QB A2.  Legal Formation?




[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: December 04, 2010, 03:36:38 PM by TxJim »
Sportsmanship is contagious - Let's have an epidemic!

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3418
  • FAN REACTION: +114/-35
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2010, 03:50:50 PM »
Looks like the shoulder of A23 is breaking the plane of the rear-most part of A50(?), so he's not a back. Neither is he a lineman, so it's illegal formation.

Offline Etref

  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 2371
  • FAN REACTION: +87/-29
  • " I don't make the rules coach!"
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2010, 06:17:28 PM »
But how many times have we been told to make them legal if they are spread out?
" I don't make the rules coach!"

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2010, 05:51:37 PM »
[yt=425,350]OKZIGpg103Y[/yt]

Offline TxSkyBolt

  • *
  • Posts: 2007
  • FAN REACTION: +45/-46
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2010, 06:51:19 PM »
Couldn't really tell, but it looks like an illegal shift also.  QB and motion man both moving at the snap.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2010, 07:52:06 PM »
Couldn't really tell, but it looks like an illegal shift also.  QB and motion man both moving at the snap.

It's not Illegal Motion.  The snap takes place before the QB starts backward.  #23 simply takes the snap and pauses to make the defense think Newton is retreating with the ball.  If the snap didn't take place then, it's still not Illegal Motion, it would be a False Start on Newton for simulating the snap.

It might be Illegal Formation, hard to tell, but probably so.  In any case, it was stupid, and certainly unnecessary.

Offline With_Two_Flakes

  • *
  • Posts: 439
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-2
  • British American Football Referees Association
Re: SEC Championship - Legal Formation?
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2010, 09:57:14 PM »
But how many times have we been told to make them legal if they are spread out?
Indeed. We have been told lots of times and that makes sense.

A wideout who is yards away from the nearest interior lineman gains little advantage from being a few inches forward or backward and can genuinely struggle to tell whether he is on or off the line or somewhere in between even on a nicely marked field. No-one comes to watch me throw half a dozen 5 yarders every game for that kind of thing, so my supervisor tells me to make 'em legal if they are spread out.

But on this play, #23 is not spread out, he is right behind, indeed almost underneath, the O line, thus has every opportunity to ensure he is not in no-mans land. And he clearly gains an advantage from this illegal position.

I recall a senior Div 1 white hat telling me that on any trick play (which this is), the offense damn well better have everything absolutely perfect - players being inside the 9yd marks, the formation of the line, being set for second, etc, etc.
Sorry Death, you lose! It was Professor Plum....