Scrimmage Kick Formation (Numbering Exception w/ 10 Team A players)

[NVFOA_Ump]

So here's a little quiz. In what chronological order and what year goes with these rules changes that have resulted in the current Twilight Zone re: scrimmage kick formations when less than 11 are on the field for team A?

-  Team A formation rules change from a minimum 7 linemen required on the LOS to no more than 4 in the backfield.
-  The scrimmage kick numbering exception added that was intended to allow a "skill player" to snap the ball without putting on an interior lineman numbered jersey.
-  Most current wording which allows less that 5 interior lineman on the LOS when a "scrimmage kick is obvious"
- Other changes that should be here affecting the scrimmage kick formation rules?

[BlindZebra]

So here's a little quiz. In what chronological order and what year goes with these rules changes that have resulted in the current Twilight Zone re: scrimmage kick formations when less than 11 are on the field for team A?

-  Team A formation rules change from a minimum 7 linemen required on the LOS to no more than 4 in the backfield.  -  Not sure when it was changed but I know it was recent.  5 or so years ago maybe.
-  The scrimmage kick numbering exception added that was intended to allow a "skill player" to snap the ball without putting on an interior lineman numbered jersey.  -  I don't think it was intended to do this but is a byproduct of the rule.  This has been a rule for as long as I can remember.
-  Most current wording which allows less that 5 interior lineman on the LOS when a "scrimmage kick is obvious"  -  2-16-10 is the definition of a scrimmage kick formation.  7-1-4-a-5 talks about numbering exception requirements.  Put those together and you have your numbering exception requirements.  I remember when I played back in high school, our long snapper was also one of our receivers and he wore 86.
- Other changes that should be here affecting the scrimmage kick formation rules?

See my comments in red.  Numbering exception is definitely a confusing rule but if you remember a couple of things it should become easy.

1. Are we in scrimmage kick formation and a kick is obvious?  If no - then we have to be numbered legally.  If yes - then numbering exceptions apply.

2. Since numbering exceptions apply, all we really need is 5 players on the line and no more then 4 in the backfield.

3. Once the snapper is established, all interior linemen MUST REMAIN interior linemen.  If the end shifts and becomes a back, someone better cover that interior linemen before we snap the ball.  If he does not get covered, we have an illegal formation.

If all is met, we have a legal play regardless of how many Team A players are on the field.

[BrendanP]

Wasn't the numbering exception also done to allow the long snapper to run downfield immediately after the ball is snapped? I must say as for the formation issue, if I had a dime for every time I've had an illegal formation out of this punt scheme, I could probably buy a full set of gear for the entire crew:

[Kalle]

Wasn't the numbering exception also done to allow the long snapper to run downfield immediately after the ball is snapped? I must say as for the formation issue, if I had a dime for every time I've had an illegal formation out of this punt scheme, I could probably buy a full set of gear for the entire crew:

NCAA has allowed all linemen to go downfield immediately after the snap on kick plays at least since 1990.

[NVFOA_Ump]

So here's the bottom line IMHO.  Until the group of rule changes that were done in 2011 & 2012 the "problem" here when we had less than 11 on the field on a scrimmage kick did not exist (we still had to have 7 on the line with 5 interior linemen).  Now, if team A "forgets" to send in the full 11 players on a scrimmage kick play, the location of eligible vs ineligible players can be manipulated to team A's advantage.

If team A is in scrimmage kick formation with all players numbered 1 to 49 for the 5th time in the game with the exact same lineup for the 5th time, except this time the wide man on the right side is missing (ie: 10 men in formation) and the "right tackle" (now also the right end due to the missing player) goes downfield and immediately catches a pass from the "kicker" for a first down would you have a flag for an Illegal Formation or a Substitution foul?  Isn't intentionally using the substitution process to deceive the opponent a foul under our rules?

If it's obvious and simple common sense that the play was scripted beforehand, and required a "substitution error" to work "legally", what would you call?

[#92]

Wasn't the numbering exception also done to allow the long snapper to run downfield immediately after the ball is snapped? I must say as for the formation issue, if I had a dime for every time I've had an illegal formation out of this punt scheme, I could probably buy a full set of gear for the entire crew:

You mean because the 3rd player on the right hand side of the snapper is in no man's land, correct?

[hefnerjm]

Follow-up question: #2 here would be eligible, because he is at the end(s) of the line?

I was wondering this as well. 

If the team "can" line up with just 5 players: the snapper (#2) and 4 backs all numbered 1-49, would the snapper be eligible for being on the end of the line?  Is Team A allowed to not have any interior linemen? 

If yes, then ok.
If no, we have a problem with an inconstantly applied explanation for the original question.

[Welpe]

I was wondering this as well. 

If the team "can" line up with just 5 players: the snapper (#2) and 4 backs all numbered 1-49, would the snapper be eligible for being on the end of the line? 

Yes.

Is Team A allowed to not have any interior linemen? 

As long as they're in scrimmage kick formation, yes.

[Kalle]

Here's Rom's take on this from this week's quiz at http://romgilbert.us/quiz16.htm :

4th/10 A40. Team A is lined up in a scrimmage kick formation with six linemen and four backs. The linemen from left to right are 87 75 82 83 84 88. A17's legal forward pass is complete to A87 for a touchdown. A88 was seven yards downfield when the pass was thrown.

Ruling: Touchdown. A try B3. Legal formation. Legal play.

[NVFOA_Ump]

So what would you rule here:

4th and long and Team A wholesale subs multiple players in each case and for the 1st three scrimmage kick formations in the game we have 7 linemen, 5 in the "tackle box" (2 wide out by the sidelines) and 4 backs (same players in each case w/"kicker" 15 yards back) and team A punts:

87 ------------ 75 82 83 84 88 ------------- 89

4th scrimmage kick formation, 4th/10 A40. Team A is lined up in a scrimmage kick formation with six linemen, 5 in the "tackle box" (1 wide out by the sideline) and four backs (w/"kicker" 10 yards back). The linemen from left to right are:

 87 ------------ 75 82 83 84 88 -------------

"Kicker" A17's legal forward pass is complete to A88 for a touchdown. A88 was seven yards downfield when he caught the pass.

[Kalle]

If the team B player who is assigned to cover the right end is stupid enough not to cover anybody when he should be covering #89, it is a coaching problem.

Change this to the linemen being a wideout 87, then six men in the box with 75 82 81 83 84 88 with 83 being the snapper. Do you expect somebody to cover 88 here? If so, why wouldn't he be covered if #81 is missing?

[TXMike]

Don't over complicate your life.  This is a legal formation and a TD.  And if you even start to tell me you remember the previous formations and the numbering scheme when the 4 th SKF comes around I am calling uiu rain man

[NVFOA_Ump]

Not rain man but simple observation.  Don't the facts given clearly indicate that team A has used the substitution rules to deceive team B by only sending out 10 players?  Given the "coincidence" that this would have been an illegal lineman downfield if there was not a "missing player", it's obvious that the "missing player" was part of the planned play and not a substitution error.  Why does this not violate the guidance about using the substitution process to deceive the opponent and gain an advantage?

[DallasLJ]

Not rain man but simple observation.  Don't the facts given clearly indicate that team A has used the substitution rules to deceive team B by only sending out 10 players?  Given the "coincidence" that this would have been an illegal lineman downfield if there was not a "missing player", it's obvious that the "missing player" was part of the planned play and not a substitution error.  Why does this not violate the guidance about using the substitution process to deceive the opponent and gain an advantage?

  I would say no -- at some point doesn't the defense have an obligation to do their job?  This is not a hide out play which is what the unfair tactics rule for abuse of the substitution process is trying to avoid.

[Joe Stack]

team A has used the substitution rules to deceive team B by only sending out 10 players?

I don't think you can actually deceive a team by doing something that's legal. The substitution rules prevent several things associated with substitution or the sub process, but they don't prevent this.

Simply because deception becomes illegal when handled in certain ways doesn't mean it is illegal when used in other ways. To me, the play described isn't any different than an eligible number wide out on the line shifting off the line and making a tight end or even an eligible number tackle eligible by position.

[JasonTX]

It's quite simple for Team B.  Cover the ends who have eligible numbers and cover the backs with eligible numbers.  All other players will be ineligible.

[dvasques]

Wow... my head is spinning...

7-1-4-a-3 - at least 5 lineman wearing 50-79, except on scrimmage kick formation

7-1-4-a-5 - no need for 5 lineman wearing 50-79 as long as:

(a) Any and all linemen not numbered 50-79 who are ineligible receiver(s) by position become exceptions to the numbering rule when the snapper is established.

so is not that we need exceptions to the numbering rule... but every covered eligible receiver becomes the exception. So... why is there an exception?

(b) Any and all such numbering-exception players must be on the line and may not be on the end of the line. Otherwise, Team A commits a foul for an illegal formation.

so if A lines up with 6 at the line, the ends are not ineligible by position, so they don't become exception do the numbering rule.

Again... why is there an exception?

What is the relevance of the exception? Why not just say there is no need for 5 ineligible numbers on the line in scrimmage kick formation?

In any formation, eligible receivers who are covered at the line become ineligible. There is no change there.

The exception is there only to avoid shifting craziness?

What difference does the shifting craziness make if we know that only the two ends with eligible numbers are eligible after all?

[NVFOA_Ump]

The history of the rule changes show that the multiple rules "simplifications" made in 2012-2013 badly garbled the required linemen alignment language on scrimmage kick plays.

The result of it all was the effective loss of the clear requirement for a minimum of 5 interior linemen on all scrimmage downs.  While in some cases, the absurd ones with some minimal number of players way less than 11 are still "legal" in scrimmage kick formations, the ones that IMHO are a problem are the ones where there is obviously a pre-planned "substitution error" to put 10 players on the field and then mask who the eligible pass receivers are going to be.

The original numbering exception rules were made to allow team A to use the "best players" for scrimmage kicks (the long snapper and defenders for kick returns) without having to change jersey numbers.  That change, combined with the alignment rules changes has left an opportunity for intentional abuse by creative coaches.

I've only seen this used in youth football (twice by the same team) but I'm betting that as soon as it gets used in a BCS game and results in a game changing play the rule will be changed.

[Kalle]

What is the relevance of the exception? Why not just say there is no need for 5 ineligible numbers on the line in scrimmage kick formation?

I think this is due to the change a few years back where team A now may have a legal formation where there are 10 players and a WR is missing from the line. I don't remember if there was any extra information distributed at that time as to which linemen may be missing, but as the rules are now written, on a non-SKF down team A may not have fewer than five linemen numbered 50-79, even if they play with only the snapper and a back, to take an extreme example.

I think team A gains no advantage if they have 10 players, four of which are numbered 50-79 and are on the line together with two eligible numbers at the ends. It seems that some officials think that team A does gain an advantage.

[Kalle]

The result of it all was the effective loss of the clear requirement for a minimum of 5 interior linemen on all scrimmage downs.  While in some cases, the absurd ones with some minimal number of players way less than 11 are still "legal" in scrimmage kick formations, the ones that IMHO are a problem are the ones where there is obviously a pre-planned "substitution error" to put 10 players on the field and then mask who the eligible pass receivers are going to be.

You can mask the eligible receivers from a SKF with 11, so I still fail to see any extra advantage gained by leaving out players.

Play situation: 4th and 20 from B-40. Team A has players numbered 1 through 11 on the field. They line up with A1 11 yards behind the ball. The potential snapper A2 stands upright behind the ball. Players A3-A11 are scattered on the line of scrimmage. With an audible from A1 players A3, A4 and A5 move clearly off the line. A6 and A7 become ends of the line with A8, A9, A10, A11 and A2 being the interior linemen. While A3, A4 and A5 are shifting to the backfield, A2 assumes the normal snapper posture with his hands on the ball. All team A players stop for one second, and A2 snaps the ball while team B is still sorting out the coverage assignments. A3-A7 all run deep passing routes. A1 throws a legal forward pass to A4 who catches the ball in team B's end zone.