Author Topic: No Mans Land?  (Read 707 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BetweenTheLines

  • *
  • Posts: 46
  • FAN REACTION: +2/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
No Mans Land?
« on: June 08, 2019, 11:09:05 AM »
In studying Reddings and have taken a few exams I understand the rule from reading 7-2-3 but not quite the intent. What was the problem that led to this rule being written? Also, has anyone ever flagged a player outside of the definition of 2-32-3 lined up outside of the tackles?

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 890
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-9
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2019, 12:45:27 PM »
When I worked the wing, I asked players (or their coaches if they were behind me) to make my job easy - either be ON the line, or step back and be OFF. I donít think I ever flagged a WR for being in no manís land. As long as a DB matches up, what is the advantage gained?  I have flagged WRs if two of them are clearly ON the line and both go out for a pass, as long as a pass is thrown.

Good question about the origin of the rule.  I donít have any idea.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3637
  • FAN REACTION: +283/-540
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2019, 05:12:31 PM »
In studying Reddings and have taken a few exams I understand the rule from reading 7-2-3 but not quite the intent. What was the problem that led to this rule being written? Also, has anyone ever flagged a player outside of the definition of 2-32-3 lined up outside of the tackles?

Can't say for certain, but memory suggests both rules were written prior to the establishment of requirements for forward pass eligibility numbers  (NFHS 7-2-3) or Player Numbering Requirements (NFHS 7-2-5-b) both of which seem designed and intended to assist with player/position identification from when previously positions were not limited to specific numbers.

As for a "preventive officiating" practice, asking a player whether he is on/off the line, or simply telling the outside receiver whether he is actually on/off the line seems a practical way to avoid an unnecessary problem.  The player still determines his final position.

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2410
  • FAN REACTION: +78/-25
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2019, 07:31:13 AM »
As long as a DB matches up, what is the advantage gained?

The problem happens if the player in question is potentially covering up another receiver.  Do I commit a DB to cover that receiver as well, or not?

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2406
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-13
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2019, 07:47:36 AM »
 The defense is unsure whether or not the A player is a an eligible receiver.  It creates an illegal deception and gains a potential advantage because B is committing to pass defending that A player when they didn't need to do so.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3637
  • FAN REACTION: +283/-540
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #5 on: June 09, 2019, 09:44:40 PM »
The defense is unsure whether or not the A player is a an eligible receiver.  It creates an illegal deception and gains a potential advantage because B is committing to pass defending that A player when they didn't need to do so.

The Defense is also unsure whether (or in which direction) A may be planning to run the ball and how they decide to defend that alignment is THEIR choice.  There is no way the Defense can be sure what A may do with an unbalanced line.  A may well be hoping to deceive the defense, but until the ball is snapped and the play develops any deception intended is perfectly legal, until someone does something illegal (like go downfield, after being covered and a forward pass is thrown.)

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • FAN REACTION: +154/-5
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #6 on: June 09, 2019, 10:10:53 PM »
The other way they could be getting an advantage is the T will try to cheat back to help block the edge. He may be aligned with the G but behind the waist of the snapper. We are more likely to call this a foul because the advantage is more obvious. Receivers who are supposed to be on the line but are in no-man's land are gaining an advantage if they are pressed because it's easier for them to make a move against the pressing defender.

Most of the time though the player in no-man's land is supposed to be a back but are too close to the LOS to be breaking the plane of the nearest lineman. That's less than of an issue and usually ignored (other than a talk-to) because it's fairly clear he's supposed to be a back and eligible receiver, and he's not likely gaining a major advantage where he is.

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1408
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-13
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2019, 05:30:11 PM »
WR round these parts indicate to the official by either pointing forward (I'm on), or pointing to the rear (I'm off)...and the wing will confirm their intent or advise they need to adjust
Trying to de-code what they're saying verbally is a challenge with mouthpiece, crowd noise, etc.

In as far as 'legally, by the book' being a back (i.e. breaking the center's waist or not), as along as there's some sort of stagger (i.e. the 'blade of grass' axiom), no one gets too technical over that round these parts.

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1260
  • FAN REACTION: +31/-44
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2019, 10:25:57 AM »
Where I've seen the backside guard and/or tackle "cheating" back is when they are going to pull.  It does give that player an advantage.  The official has to determine how much of and advantage.  Getting to the HC early may (or may not) make a difference; but after you let him know that you know and how you interpret their formation, and no change is made, the official has to decide if he wants to "die on that hill" or not.

Personally, I'm carrying the flag up that hill....

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3081
  • FAN REACTION: +383/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #9 on: June 13, 2019, 01:48:55 PM »
Can't say for certain, but memory suggests both rules were written prior to the establishment of requirements for forward pass eligibility numbers  (NFHS 7-2-3) or Player Numbering Requirements (NFHS 7-2-5-b) both of which seem designed and intended to assist with player/position identification from when previously positions were not limited to specific numbers.

As for a "preventive officiating" practice, asking a player whether he is on/off the line, or simply telling the outside receiver whether he is actually on/off the line seems a practical way to avoid an unnecessary problem.  The player still determines his final position.
Recommended numbering (1-4-2) was put in back in 1963.
Seven men on the line was RECOMMENDED by Teddy Roosevelt (when he was president) or he would outlaw both football and public hangings.
TR was between McKinley and Taft on the presidential depth chart.
In 1950, 7-3-2 an end can take a forward handoff without facing his own goal.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3637
  • FAN REACTION: +283/-540
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2019, 03:59:50 PM »
Recommended numbering (1-4-2) was put in back in 1963.
Seven men on the line was RECOMMENDED by Teddy Roosevelt (when he was president) or he would outlaw both football and public hangings.
TR was between McKinley and Taft on the presidential depth chart.
In 1950, 7-3-2 an end can take a forward handoff without facing his own goal.

56 years ago TR recognized the need to limit the functionality of players numbers, but even before that football was understood to be a game of advantages, as long as those advantages were not deemed as being unfair.  The offense (often crafty little devils) try and create confusion (advantage) by using the same formation structure to serve different plans of attack, hopefully concealing their actual plan.

The defense, if/when capable, is able to recognize these attempts and counter with their own formations, able to handle multiple threats and thereby negate any (intended) covert advantage.

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2406
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-13
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #11 on: June 13, 2019, 04:14:01 PM »
I just want to ask Al and Ralph what it was like back when TR came out with this.

 >:D

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3081
  • FAN REACTION: +383/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2019, 08:50:24 AM »
I just want to ask Al and Ralph what it was like back when TR came out with this.

 >:D
I could have asked my grandfather, who was a Doughboy in WW I, but he was probably worried more of the Huns then the flying wedge. However he passed in 1956. I recalled being at his bedside during his last days, and saying : "GRAMPS, DON LARSON JUST THREW A PERFECT GAME IN THE WORLD SERIES !!!"  ;D . Gramps responded : " >:( BUT, he's a YANKEE  >:( >" It may have been then when Yankee feelings began.   cRaZy

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3637
  • FAN REACTION: +283/-540
Re: No Mans Land?
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2019, 10:50:52 AM »
I could have asked my grandfather, who was a Doughboy in WW I, but he was probably worried more of the Huns then the flying wedge. However he passed in 1956. I recalled being at his bedside during his last days, and saying : "GRAMPS, DON LARSON JUST THREW A PERFECT GAME IN THE WORLD SERIES !!!"  ;D . Gramps responded : " >:( BUT, he's a YANKEE  >:( >" It may have been then when Yankee feelings began.   cRaZy

With due respect and gratitude for your Grandfather's service, being a Red Sox fan, he likely had little, (if any) personal exposure or memory of what a World Series actually was all about. 1956 was my first year at the BEST HS summer job EVER (vendor for Harry M. Stevens, Inc. at both Yankee Stadium & Polo Grounds (where the NY Giants played before heading West ) "Hereyar peanuts here". Different crew covered Ebbets field.

A lot of happy memories that seem to fade, a little more, each passing year (except for those 2 GD Inadvertent whistles whose details remain as clear as the day each happened, as has the understanding, "No matter how hard you suck on a whistle, you can't get the tweet back".).
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 11:05:24 AM by AlUpstateNY »