WAC Pre-Season Test

[baseburglr]

Does anyone have the answers to the WAC Pre-Season Tests?

[azsteam]

Here

[attachment deleted by admin]

[6310 Forever]

Can someone post the WAC pre-season 2011 exam?  Thanks in advance.

[azsteam]

I have combine the 8 test into 1 pdf file.



[attachment deleted by admin]

[frank.malone]

There are two 75 questions. Both different. Is the pdf OK?

Regards
Frank.

[Grant - AR]

There are two 75 questions. Both different. Is the pdf OK?

Regards
Frank.

Frank,

I think I found the error. There is no #77.  I think the second #75 should be #76 and #76 should be #77.

[frank.malone]

I have retyped the pre-season test. Here is the result.

Regards
Frank

[attachment deleted by admin]

[JasonTX]

What are the thoughts on this question from the WAC Test


33. Third-and-Four on B33. QBA11 lines up but erroneously puts his hands under
Right Guard A66. Center A55 snaps the ball to Tail Back A43 who runs to the B29.
B68 was offside at the snap.    Answer Key:   A 1-10 at B-28

This should be offestting fouls due to the position of the QB.  Since he is not in position to receive a hand to hand snap he makes the formation illegal when he lines up under the guard

[Grant - AR]

What are the thoughts on this question from the WAC Test


33. Third-and-Four on B33. QBA11 lines up but erroneously puts his hands under
Right Guard A66. Center A55 snaps the ball to Tail Back A43 who runs to the B29.
B68 was offside at the snap.    Answer Key:   A 1-10 at B-28

This should be offestting fouls due to the position of the QB.  Since he is not in position to receive a hand to hand snap he makes the formation illegal when he lines up under the guard

Anyone have any insight on this question?

[frank.malone]

Why should be illegal formation? If no more than 4 man in backfield the formation is legal. There is no pass, so I think the play is OK. Could be a trick play to disguise the run. No A fault in my understanding.

Any more ideas would be appreciated.

Regards
Frank.

[elewis023]

Look at 7-1-1-b-1 Exception 2

Since the QB is not a lineman or back, he is in "no-man's land".  The QB is usually absolved of this foul when he is in position to receive the ball from the snapper.  Since he is no longer under center (snapper), the formation is illegal (just like a WR who is in between being on the LOS and being a back).

I wouldn't consider this to be unfair tactics, although that may have been the intent, simply a formation foul.

[RicFlairWoo]

Question #14.  Is it possible to have a 1 point safety for A.  B is responsible for the ball being in its own endzone, where the ball becomes dead by rule. (although in A's possession).  Does the 4th down fumble rule of the ball being returned to the spot of the fumble, trump the fact that the ball did become dead in B's endzone, with B being responsible for it being there?

[JasonTX]

Question #14.  Is it possible to have a 1 point safety for A.  B is responsible for the ball being in its own endzone, where the ball becomes dead by rule. (although in A's possession).  Does the 4th down fumble rule of the ball being returned to the spot of the fumble, trump the fact that the ball did become dead in B's endzone, with B being responsible for it being there?

How many points would team A score in this play had there not been a rule for 4th down fumbles?  This is a TD (2pt on a try) by rule because team A has possession of the ball beyond the opponents goalline.  But since we do have the 4th down fumble rule the ball comes back to the spot of the fumble and the try is over.  Had team B recovered, it would have been a 1 pt safety. 

[6310 Forever]

Taking the test in random sections, I disagree with the following.  I have:

168.  A 4/1 B41 - snap
171.  A4/20 B30
173.  B 1/10 B 1/2
177.  B 1/10 A11
181.  A 1/10 A34
196.  A 1/G B1
197.  A 1/10 B20 - extend

[JasonTX]

Taking the test in random sections, I disagree with the following.  I have:

168.  A 4/1 B41 - snap
171.  A4/20 B30
173.  B 1/10 B 1/2
177.  B 1/10 A11
181.  A 1/10 A34
196.  A 1/G B1
197.  A 1/10 B20 - extend
[/quote

For question 196:  The continuity of downs has ended when team A recovered the ball beyond the NZ and it was not touched by team B beyond the NZ.

[Aussie-Zebra]

Look at 7-1-1-b-1 Exception 2

Since the QB is not a lineman or back, he is in "no-man's land".  The QB is usually absolved of this foul when he is in position to receive the ball from the snapper.  Since he is no longer under center (snapper), the formation is illegal (just like a WR who is in between being on the LOS and being a back).
[/quote]

7-1-1-b-1 Exception 2 -  I can't find this reference in the current NCAA rule book.

If Team A has no more than four players in the backfield and the required number of players (five) on the line wearing 50-79 then it doesn't matter if the QB is in no mans land.
The WR in no mans land is not a penalty, it just means you put him in the backfiled, its only a penalty if there are already 4 in the backfield.

[Andrew McCarthy]

Look at 7-1-1-b-1 Exception 2

Since the QB is not a lineman or back, he is in "no-man's land".  The QB is usually absolved of this foul when he is in position to receive the ball from the snapper.  Since he is no longer under center (snapper), the formation is illegal (just like a WR who is in between being on the LOS and being a back).


7-1-1-b-1 Exception 2 -  I can't find this reference in the current NCAA rule book.

If Team A has no more than four players in the backfield and the required number of players (five) on the line wearing 50-79 then it doesn't matter if the QB is in no mans land.
The WR in no mans land is not a penalty, it just means you put him in the backfiled, its only a penalty if there are already 4 in the backfield.

All players must be either linemen or backs.  7-1-4-a-2

[Aussie-Zebra]

Thank you for clearing that up Andrew.