Author Topic: Swinging gate and the new formation rule  (Read 4011 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #75 on: August 02, 2019, 06:51:47 PM »
Concerning the original scrimmage kick formation. The formation itself is legal but the numbering is illegal.

A1   A2   A3   A4   A5   A6 (snapper)

A7                                               A8   
                                 A9
                            A10

2-14-1: A Scrimmage Formation requires a minimum of FIVE players legally on their line at the snap.
7-2-5b: At the snap, at least FIVE A players on their line of scrimmage MUST be numbered 50-79. Exception 7-2-5b2: On fourth down or during a kick try, when A sets of shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation, any A player numbered 1 to 49 or 80 to 99 may take the position of any player numbered 50-79. A player in the game under this exception MUST assume an initial position (After the snapper has placed his hand/hands on the ball.) on his line of scrimmage BETWEEN the ends and he remains an ineligable forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B.

Since there are only FOUR players in the game under this exception between the ends, the numbering exception has not been satisfied.
A1 & A6 are eligible because of position and number. Therefore when the ball is snapped A has committed an illegal numbering foul



                         

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #76 on: August 02, 2019, 07:13:41 PM »
Concerning the original scrimmage kick formation. The formation itself is legal but the numbering is illegal.

A1   A2   A3   A4   A5   A6 (snapper)

A7                                               A8   
                                 A9
                            A10

2-14-1: A Scrimmage Formation requires a minimum of FIVE players legally on their line at the snap.
7-2-5b: At the snap, at least FIVE A players on their line of scrimmage MUST be numbered 50-79. Exception 7-2-5b2: On fourth down or during a kick try, when A sets of shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation, any A player numbered 1 to 49 or 80 to 99 may take the position of any player numbered 50-79. A player in the game under this exception MUST assume an initial position (After the snapper has placed his hand/hands on the ball.) on his line of scrimmage BETWEEN the ends and he remains an ineligable forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B.

Since there are only FOUR players in the game under this exception between the ends, the numbering exception has not been satisfied.
A1 & A6 are eligible because of position and number. Therefore when the ball is snapped A has committed an illegal numbering foul



                         
This has been the question all along. Do you have an official interpretation of this? Or is it your personal opinion?  Because the 4th down exception doesnít specify the number of interior linemen. I agree your position seems logical, but from the other responses, not everyone agrees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #77 on: August 02, 2019, 08:15:00 PM »
This has been the question all along. Do you have an official interpretation of this? Or is it your personal opinion?  Because the 4th down exception doesnít specify the number of interior linemen. I agree your position seems logical, but from the other responses, not everyone agrees.

Not my personal opinion. I believe the interpretation is in the Rule itself. "At the snap, at least FIVE players on the line of scrimmage must be numbered 50-79" with 2 exceptions: 1-3 down and on 4th down. On 4th down a team in scrimmage kick formation still needs 5 players on the line of scrimmage with numbers 50-79 but in this exception, they can be REPLACED by players numbered 1- 49 or 80-99 and MUST line up between the ends. So, in essence, you have to have FIVE players line up between the ends who normally would have lineman numbers. With the new rule, if you only have FIVE players on the line of scrimmage in a scrimmage kick formation with receiver numbers, they would all be ineligible because now they are in the game under the exception of replacing FIVE linemen numbered 50-79 and are ineligible during the down even if they are on the end of the line. Why because at the snap A needs FIVE players on the line of scrimmage numbered 50-79 unless they are in under the exception.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #78 on: August 02, 2019, 08:40:40 PM »
Not my personal opinion. I believe the interpretation is in the Rule itself. "At the snap, at least Five A players on their line of scrimmage must be numbered 50-79." This rule does not change but the numbers can. There are two exceptions to this, 1-3 & 4th downs. On 4th down when team A is in scrimmage kick formation, with the exception, these players can be REPLACED by players with receiver numbers. The requirement of FIVE legal linemen is still in effect, just the numbers have changed. With the new scrimmage requirements, if there are more than five in the formation the players who are in under the exception MUST line up between the ends and are ineligible during the down. Furthermore, by rule, if there are only FIVE linemen in the formation with receiver numbers, even if they are on the end of the line, they all would be ineligible because they are in the game under the exception, in other words, they are in effect lineman normally numbered 50-79.

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #79 on: August 03, 2019, 12:51:36 AM »
I am correcting the last sentence in my last post. I stated if there are only 5 linemen on the LOS with receivers numbers in a scrimmage kick formation they are all ineligible receivers. This is not true. The point I was trying to make in this situation is if all 5 stayed in to block would this be a legal play? The two players on the end of the line would be eligible because of position and number. However, if one or both goes downfield on a pass play the scrimmage requirements would be violated and the penalty would be for illegal numbering. With the new scrimmage requirements, it would be impossible for these linemen to be between the ends as it states in 7-2-5b Exception2. Does this mean in scrimmage kick formations when all lineman numbers are replaced by players with receivers number there have to be 7 men on the line? Is this the confusion I was missing?

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #80 on: August 03, 2019, 06:10:11 AM »
Yes. I believe you are talking yourself into the problem. If what you say is true, then there MUST be 7 on the line on a 4th down scrimmage kick/try if/when the numbering exception is used as posted.  Otherwise, there canít be 5 ineligible by position inside the ends.  The only other option is to allow less than 5 inside the ends and simply note they are ineligible by position.

One last note- you canít just declare a player ineligible. If heís eligible by position and number, heís eligible.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 06:12:20 AM by CalhounLJ »

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2472
  • FAN REACTION: +74/-13
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #81 on: August 03, 2019, 07:35:12 AM »
Gentlemen, that is why it is an EXCEPTION.

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #82 on: August 03, 2019, 08:33:07 AM »
Gentlemen, that is why it is an EXCEPTION.
So youíre saying the exception is a formation exception in addition to a numbering exception?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 3224
  • FAN REACTION: +76/-109
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #83 on: August 03, 2019, 02:38:54 PM »
Gentlemen, that is why it is an EXCEPTION.

Sorry but this is NOT BEING TECHNICAL.  Any and all numbering exceptions MUST be inside an "end" who is not a numbering exception.  That's what the rules clearly say.  There ARE NO EXCEPTIONS to the numbering exceptions rules.  This year's 5 man line change in no way changes or even address that in any way.  We must be able to identify 5 ineligible numbers by number ("standard" scrimmage play) or by position (if the numbering exception is in play), if the numbering exception is in play then he/they must be COVERED.  Until we get a written clarification saying that the offense can mess around with the numbering exception by having 1 or more short (less than 11 players) on the field that's the way I'm calling it.  NO EXCEPTIONS.  That's what we're being instructed to do and I have 0% problem doing it because that's what the rules actually say.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 02:44:12 PM by NVFOA_Ump »
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #84 on: August 03, 2019, 02:57:59 PM »
Sorry but this is NOT BEING TECHNICAL.  Any and all numbering exceptions MUST be inside an "end" who is not a numbering exception.  That's what the rules clearly say.  There ARE NO EXCEPTIONS to the numbering exceptions rules.  This year's 5 man line change in no way changes or even address that in any way.  We must be able to identify 5 ineligible numbers by number ("standard" scrimmage play) or by position (if the numbering exception is in play), if the numbering exception is in play then he/they must be COVERED.  Until we get a written clarification saying that the offense can mess around with the numbering exception by having 1 or more short (less than 11 players) on the field that's the way I'm calling it.  NO EXCEPTIONS.  That's what we're being instructed to do and I have 0% problem doing it because that's what the rules actually say.

I agree a clarification would be nice, but I go the opposite of you. The reason this rule is changing is because it was silly to penalize a team who was short a player at the snap and only had 6 linemen. The 5 ineligible numbers is assuming there are 7 linemen and having them with ineligible numbers makes it easier to identify them during the play. The numbering exception exists to allow normally eligible numbers to take those spots during scrimmage kick plays. If you treat the interior linemen on scrimmage kick plays as exceptions and ends as eligible (assuming eligible number) it meets the spirit and intent of the numbering and formation rules that this is NOT a foul. They are already playing at a disadvantage by being a player short. We should be looking for reasons to NOT find a foul here.

But I do understand why you and others feel this should be a foul. You are requiring 7 on the line even though the rule no longer states that to be the case. Maybe the numbering exception rule could be modified to make this clearer or the rules committee could issue a clarification.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 410
  • FAN REACTION: +172/-40
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #85 on: August 03, 2019, 03:10:11 PM »
Jeez guys

7-2-5b EXCEPTION 2
Clearly defines how you may LEGALLY run a play with ZERO players numbered 50 - 79

This formation exception may only be used on 4th down or during a try.

The snapper MAY BE ELIGIBLE on 4th down or during a try. (Snapper is not eligible on downs 1 -3, See Exception 1)

At the snap the team putting the ball in play must either be in the formation described in 2-14-2a or the formation described in 2-14-2b

When they utilize this exception, there are STILL 5 players on the Offensive line of scrimmage who remain ineligible regardless of their number.

Don't overthink this play
Don't over officiate this play.

It ain't Rocket Surgery, but it did eliminate the A-11!
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 03:16:25 PM by KWH »

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #86 on: August 03, 2019, 06:34:38 PM »
Jeez guys

7-2-5b EXCEPTION 2
Clearly defines how you may LEGALLY run a play with ZERO players numbered 50 - 79

This formation exception may only be used on 4th down or during a try.

The snapper MAY BE ELIGIBLE on 4th down or during a try. (Snapper is not eligible on downs 1 -3, See Exception 1)

At the snap the team putting the ball in play must either be in the formation described in 2-14-2a or the formation described in 2-14-2b

When they utilize this exception, there are STILL 5 players on the Offensive line of scrimmage who remain ineligible regardless of their number.

Don't overthink this play
Don't over officiate this play.

It ain't Rocket Surgery, but it did eliminate the "The offense that shall not be named"!

Kevin,

What you are missing here is if they are only playing with 10 and have 6 on the line and 4 backs some feel they have an illegal formation because they don't have 5 interior linemen either wearing 50-79 or serving as an exception with an eligible number. I feel the intent of the rule is still met and the 4 interior linemen are ineligible and if any of them are wearing an eligible number they are serving as the exception.

If you say they have 5 ineligible players but 6 on the line which end is eligible and which one isn't? Obviously both ends are eligible if they are wearing an eligible number. The question is if it's a legal formation if they don't have 5 interior linemen.

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #87 on: August 03, 2019, 06:56:02 PM »
Kevin,

What you are missing here is if they are only playing with 10 and have 6 on the line and 4 backs some feel they have an illegal formation because they don't have 5 interior linemen either wearing 50-79 or serving as an exception with an eligible number. I feel the intent of the rule is still met and the 4 interior linemen are ineligible and if any of them are wearing an eligible number they are serving as the exception.

If you say they have 5 ineligible players but 6 on the line which end is eligible and which one isn't? Obviously both ends are eligible if they are wearing an eligible number. The question is if it's a legal formation if they don't have 5 interior linemen.
Exactly. My problem with letting them play with 4 ineligibles on the line instead of five is because it violates the intent and spirit of every other scrimmage formation in the game. When the rule was changed, the rules makers went to length to make sure we understood that there still had to be FIVE ineligible linemen on the line even though there could be less than 7. Even with the new change, if there are only 4 ineligible, itís a foul.
89  55  56  57  58  88
                12                       87
          22      44
This formation is a foul for illegal numbering because there are only 4 players in the line with 50-79 numbers.
What some of you are saying is that on 4th down these 4 can be replaced with the numbering exception and everything is ok.  Makes no sense.

I would also add this example is as much of a ďno harm, no foulĒ situation as 4 ineligibles on a punt play. A has obviously created a disadvantage for themselves with only 6 on the line. But itís still a foul. Unless we want to overlook it.  If thatís the case letís just do away with numbering requirements altogether.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: August 03, 2019, 07:27:14 PM by CalhounLJ »

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #88 on: August 03, 2019, 07:42:45 PM »
This formation is a foul for illegal numbering because there are only 4 players in the line with 50-79 numbers.
What some of you are saying is that on 4th down these 4 can be replaced with the numbering exception and everything is ok.  Makes no sense. [/quote]

It makes sense to me because on these plays we are allowing the kicking team to have eligible numbers in spots normally held by ineligible players. Whether that's 0 to 5 doesn't matter if you have 7. Why should it matter when you have 6?

I would also add this example is as much of a ďno harm, no foulĒ situation as 4 ineligibles on a punt play. A has obviously created a disadvantage for themselves with only 6 on the line. But itís still a foul. Unless we want to overlook it.  If thatís the case letís just do away with numbering requirements altogether.

The entire reason for the rule change was to not make it a foul if the offense had only 6 linemen with 10 players (or even more rare 5 linemen with 9 players). Why would that be any different on a scrimmage kick play than a regular scrimmage play? The offense is gaining no advantage by doing this and in fact placing themselves at a disadvantage.

If you ask yourself WHY the numbering requirements exist you'll likely land in the same place I am. If you feel an offense must have 5 interior linemen on every play you'll still be on the 2018 rule that you need at least 7 on the line.

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #89 on: August 03, 2019, 08:24:30 PM »
But thatís the point. Even though the rule was changed to allow 6 or less on the line, they still made the effort to restate the fact that there had to be 5 INELIGIBLES on the line. If thatís the case for every other formation, why is it not the case for the 4th down/try?  I donít see the difference. Seriously, if the intent is not to keep 5 ineligibles on the line, letís do away with the requirement altogether.

Chasing this rabbit to the conclusion, what if A only has three in the line during a play using the numbering exception on 4th down?

86  87  88

Holder
Kicker

Would that be a legal formation? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #90 on: August 03, 2019, 08:26:43 PM »
What if they only had three on the line and two in the backfield ready to kick it? They would all be eligible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #91 on: August 04, 2019, 12:39:25 PM »
Here is how I interpret Rule 7-2-5b Exception 2: If these receivers are in the game under this exception have less than 5 on the LOS (who otherwise would have linemen numbers) or are not lined up between the ends at the snap, K has fouled for Illegal Numbering, IN. Penalty pg. 61

5 players on the LOS in a scrimmage kick formation:
60   50   70   61   51  Legal: No player/s in under the exception.
60   20   30   40   51  Legal: 3 players in under the exception are between the ends + #'s 60 & 51.
20   60   30   40   51  Foul for IN. Only 4 legal linemen on the LOS as it relates to a scrimmage kick.
20   30   45   10   15  IN, only 3 legal linemen between the ends.

6 players on the LOS:
60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: 3 players in under the exception between the ends + #'s 51 & 60.
81   20   30   40   51   80  IN, 4 legal linemen between the ends.

7 players on the LOS:
81   60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal
81   20   30   40   10   5   80  Legal: All 5 players in under the exception are lined up between the ends.

 

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #92 on: August 04, 2019, 11:13:19 PM »
But thatís the point. Even though the rule was changed to allow 6 or less on the line, they still made the effort to restate the fact that there had to be 5 INELIGIBLES on the line. If thatís the case for every other formation, why is it not the case for the 4th down/try?  I donít see the difference. Seriously, if the intent is not to keep 5 ineligibles on the line, letís do away with the requirement altogether.

Chasing this rabbit to the conclusion, what if A only has three in the line during a play using the numbering exception on 4th down?

86  87  88

Holder
Kicker

Would that be a legal formation? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they only have 5 players in on a scrimmage kick they have much bigger issues to worry about than if we flag them for illegal numbering.

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #93 on: August 05, 2019, 04:59:05 AM »
I agree but thatís not the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 3224
  • FAN REACTION: +76/-109
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #94 on: August 05, 2019, 05:32:28 AM »
If they only have 5 players in on a scrimmage kick they have much bigger issues to worry about than if we flag them for illegal numbering.

That doesn't need a response.  We need to simply fix the wording if in fact the rules makers do not / did not intend for us to enforce the scrimmage kick exception rules AS WRITTEN.  There are very real examples where the "kicking" team can manipulate the rule when they have less than 11 on the field during a scrimmage kick exception situation if the rule is ignored.  We're not worried about the absurd scenarios that we will never see, let's stick to the issue here, the rules require that A have 5 restricted linemen on the LOS, if SK numbering exceptions he/they must be inside the end(s).  Pretty simple.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 05:34:45 AM by NVFOA_Ump »
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 410
  • FAN REACTION: +172/-40
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #95 on: August 05, 2019, 03:46:55 PM »
With all due respect, it appears a fix may or may not be needed:
The intent of the "ORIGINAL" (1982) exception was to get rid of players having to run to the sideline and put on pullover jerseys (Penny's?)
27 years later (2009) the rule was revised quite simply to all but eliminate the A-11 offense.
The (2019) rule change to allow no more than 4 in the backfield was a fix to remove what was normally a silly flag for having 6 on the line.
The rule change also opened up this can of worms.
While technically, YES, we have a flag for Illegal Numbering, I'm in the camp of: No Advantage - No Foul
Similar to Team A circling the numbers, No Foul if the defense picks you up anyway.

This is how I would officiate the situation if all K does is kick the ball:

5 players on the LOS in a scrimmage kick formation:
60   50   70   61   51  Legal: No player is eligible
60   20   30   40   51  Legal: No player is eligible
20   60   30   40   51  Legal: No player is eligible
20   30   45   10   15  Legal: No player is eligible

6 players on the LOS:
60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: Only #80 is eligible
81   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: Either #80 or #81 is eligible but not both
7 players on the LOS:
81   60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: 80 and 81 are both eligible
81   20   30   40   10   5   80  Legal: 80 and 81 are both eligible

Again, This is what I would do! I would leave my flag in my pants and move on.
However, if A/K does ANYTHING other than kick the ball I would have have a flag for illegal numbering.

I will lead the band on getting clarification and a casebook play for 2020.
I will attempt to get an interpretation prior to 2019 season.

Again, Those of you that have a flag for Illegal numbering are technically correct, but, the intent of the 2019 rule change was to decrease the number of flags not increase them.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #96 on: August 05, 2019, 04:30:00 PM »
With all due respect, it appears a fix may or may not be needed:
The intent of the "ORIGINAL" (1982) exception was to get rid of players having to run to the sideline and put on pullover jerseys (Penny's?)
27 years later (2009) the rule was revised quite simply to all but eliminate the "The offense that shall not be named" offense.
The (2019) rule change to allow no more than 4 in the backfield was a fix to remove what was normally a silly flag for having 6 on the line.
The rule change also opened up this can of worms.
While technically, YES, we have a flag for Illegal Numbering, I'm in the camp of: No Advantage - No Foul
Similar to Team A circling the numbers, No Foul if the defense picks you up anyway.

This is how I would officiate the situation if all K does is kick the ball:

5 players on the LOS in a scrimmage kick formation:
60   50   70   61   51  Legal: No player is eligible
60   20   30   40   51  Legal: No player is eligible
20   60   30   40   51  Legal: No player is eligible
20   30   45   10   15  Legal: No player is eligible

6 players on the LOS:
60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: Only #80 is eligible
81   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: Either #80 or #81 is eligible but not both
7 players on the LOS:
81   60   20   30   40   51   80  Legal: 80 and 81 are both eligible
81   20   30   40   10   5   80  Legal: 80 and 81 are both eligible

Again, This is what I would do! I would leave my flag in my pants and move on.
However, if A/K does ANYTHING other than kick the ball I would have have a flag for illegal numbering.

I will lead the band on getting clarification and a casebook play for 2020.
I will attempt to get an interpretation prior to 2019 season.

Again, Those of you that have a flag for Illegal numbering are technically correct, but, the intent of the 2019 rule change was to decrease the number of flags not increase them.

I agree with a couple exceptions. The two plays were 20 is the left end I would still say 20 is eligible since he's eligible by position and number. In the second scenario 15 would also be eligible. The key reason is it otherwise creates the situation you highlighted in the second 6-player scenario. It would be impossible to officiate or cover by the defense if one is eligible but not both. How/when do you determine that?

Players are eligible by position and number in all situations. If they are in scrimmage kick formation and 4th down/try (avoiding the weird stuff for 1st/2nd/3rd down) any interior linemen with eligible numbers are considered exception. 95% of the time there will be 5 of them so we have no issues. In the event they are playing with only 9 or 10 players, they are at a disadvantage and gain no advantage to the defense for determining who is eligible and who isn't. Any interior lineman is ineligible by position. No need to complicate it any more than that.

I'm going to look at the NCAA rules here to see why this has never been a discussion there. I believe the rules are fairly similar, but if I find anything interesting I'll share it with you.

Online CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1297
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-31
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #97 on: August 05, 2019, 04:47:14 PM »
FTR, I'm in agreement with the way Magician explained it. Any player eligible by position and number is eligible, and any player whose initial position makes him ineligible is ineligible. I just believe the 5 linemen issue needs to be addressed. I'm perfectly ok with not calling a foul for illegal numbering if that's the official word handed down.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 969
  • FAN REACTION: +156/-5
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #98 on: August 05, 2019, 05:51:03 PM »
NCAA rule for numbering exception states:

In a scrimmage kick formation at the snap Team A may have fewer than 5 linemen numbered 50-79 subject to the following conditions:
(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.

I think it's a subtle but important difference from the NFHS exception where it talks about the exceptions taking the place of one of the 5 ineligible linemen.

Offline jgf6

  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: Swinging gate and the new formation rule
« Reply #99 on: August 05, 2019, 06:23:25 PM »
20   60   30   40   51   Illegal Numbering. #20 is an eligible receiver.
20   60   30   40   15   Ilegal Numbering.  #'s 20 & 15 are eligiable receivers.

81   20   30   40   51   80   Illegal Numbering. #81 & 80 are both eligiable receivers.