Very Late Team A Substitution

[NVFOA_Ump]

At the end of the play, A88 goes to the sideline leaving the game.  No A sub comes in.  10-12 seconds later Team A breaks the huddle with 10, lines up in formation and QB A1 calls set with no A players wide on A's side of the field where's A's bench is.  QB A1 waits for the defense to get lined up and begins his signal call.  Then A89 comes off the sideline, gets just inside the numbers, gets set, as the ball is immediately snapped, A1 fires to A89 who is heading downfield along the sideline. What do you have if:

1.  A89 is uncovered as no B player notices him come in late on the "open" side of the field resulting in a TD?
2.  A89 is covered by a late responding B D-back who cannot get over to him in time to prevent the TD?
3.  A89 is covered by a late responding B D-back who breaks up the play by tipping the pass that ends up OB?

[Fatso]

In 1 and 2, Illegal Participation for using substitution process to deceive.

3 no foul, but a good firm chat with A's coach. If you want to hit A with UNS in this situation I wouldn't blame you or disagree.  I just think no actual harm done and a talk should be enough, hopefully. 

[lawdog]

Nothing in any of them.  He comes inside the numbers for more than a second before the snap.  That's the rule.  This isn't using substitution to deceive.  The play ended with a guy out of bounds.  They are lined up with 10, B can see that just as easy as A can.  Guys runs in, cover him.  This is textbook by the book legal. 

IF you think there is a foul, there are two options, illegal formation for not getting inside the numbers or illegal participation for deceiving them.  No need to try to make up an unsportsmanlike for something clearly covered by the rules.  If the rulesmakers wanted this to be unsportsmanlike that's what they'd make it instead of illegal participation.

[Fatso]

The described play is a textbook hideout play.  I don't know what else to tell you.   

[ncwingman]

The described play is a textbook hideout play.  I don't know what else to tell you.

First, the hideout play is covered by 9-6-4d, which is illegal participation, not UNS.

However, what is the minimum amount of a time a player must be on the field before the snap?

[Fatso]

First, the hideout play is covered by 9-6-4d, which is illegal participation, not UNS.

However, what is the minimum amount of a time a player must be on the field before the snap?

Agreed on illegal participation, that's why I said Illegal participation in my response. 

As far as minimum amount of time a player must be on field, I assume at least one full second with the whole team being set.  Sending the player on just before the snap and he's the one the ball is passed to is clearly a deceptive action.

[Kalle]

As far as minimum amount of time a player must be on field, I assume at least one full second with the whole team being set.  Sending the player on just before the snap and he's the one the ball is passed to is clearly a deceptive action.

Isn't this a very basic rule? If the entire team A, including A89 after he enters, did not stop for a full second before the snap, this is a foul (not an NFHS guy, but I guess it is an illegal shift; some other codes have it a DB false start).

[Fatso]

Isn't this a very basic rule? If the entire team A, including A89 after he enters, did not stop for a full second before the snap, this is a foul (not an NFHS guy, but I guess it is an illegal shift; some other codes have it a DB false start).

OP said player came inside the numbers and got set.  So it wasn't an illegal shift or false start.  Question is was the late sub deceptive or not.  In my opinion, there's no way it wasn't done intentionally to deceive the defense.  If it was an innocent "oh CRAP we only have 10 - little Jimmy get in there and stand still" then ok. But this player who came on late was the target for the pass and somehow knew the play without being in the huddle or on the field except for a second or two (and ran on while the QB had already started calling signals).

[sj]

Another thing they will pull is that Team A will purposefully play a down with 10 and run a play so the next snap will be from the hash farthest away from their own bench. Then just like the play here, they will bring a player in late who lines up inside the numbers, snap it, and throw to him.

This happened in Oklahoma this last week or two. The Referee had counted 10 and he told the quarterback that they only had 10 and the quarterback just ignored him. So he said his antenna went up. Then the first play was run with 10 and then they lined up for the next play. The substitute came in late to inside the numbers and they flagged it at the snap. They did a great job.

[NVFOA_Ump]

..... what is the minimum amount of a time a player must be on the field before the snap?

I don't think that the time in seconds is the focus here.  IMHO the "time" in question has more to do with the play timing as described.  Open wing, team A in formation. QB has called initial signal and team B is focusing on the current alignment and the ball status.  The timing here I believe triggers 9-6-4-d as noted above.  Another "judgment guide" that has been repeated many times is something like "Would this substitution work if the open wing was on the opposite side of the field from team A's sideline?"

This type of play has been eliminated at most levels by requiring the officiating crew to hold the snap for a "match-up" period to give B the time to respond to the substitution, but for NFHS it's still left as a judgment call.   Maybe we should fix that?

[ElvisLives]

Different rule set, but NCAA has more ammunition on the gun belt for this, with the substitution ‘match up’ rule, But, even then, coaches still try this stuff. I had a coach/team attempt to use the ‘classic’ hideout play a few years ago, with having a guy jog/walk to near the sideline after a down was over, then set up near the sideline. The coach had told me about possibly using this, and I told him it would probably not be legal. But he tried it anyway. As R, I saw the player moving out to the sideline, looking for all the world like he was going to leave the field. Then he stopped very near the sideline. I knew this was it.
Instead of waiting to throw the flag, or hope my sideline guys would throw a flag, I decided just to thwart the attempt. I stopped the game clock, and started moving toward that sideline, asking the line judge to confirm the down with me. Now, with all eyes on me and my line judge, with the hideout guy right there, too, I’m verifying, “Do you have third down? I need to verify the down. 3rd down? Yes? Oh. OK. 3rd down.” With all of that, Team B sees the hideout guy, and moves a defensive back over to cover him. Back to play. Ball is snapped, pass is thrown, incomplete. 4th down. No more attempts to run the hideout.
As the two Bobs said in Office Space, I “…fixed the glitch.”

[refjeff]

Nothing in any of them.  He comes inside the numbers for more than a second before the snap.  That's the rule.  This isn't using substitution to deceive. 

  Of course it is.  I've had this same conversation four previous times this season, either in person or online.  I don't understand why officials don't "get" this.

I'm throwing a flag on all three.  A will accept the penalty in A & B and has a choice to make in C.  I am not having a long conversation with the coach unless he requests a conference.  Then I will explain the rule to him and can show him in the rule and case book if he requests.  He will be charged for the TO.

[Stripes50]

Check out case play 3.7.5 Sit A. "Furthermore the act of coming on the field must not deceive the defensive team."

[lawdog]

  Of course it is.  I've had this same conversation four previous times this season, either in person or online.  I don't understand why officials don't "get" this.

I'm throwing a flag on all three.  A will accept the penalty in A & B and has a choice to make in C.  I am not having a long conversation with the coach unless he requests a conference.  Then I will explain the rule to him and can show him in the rule and case book if he requests.  He will be charged for the TO.

And his response will be there was no illegal substitution, there was a just a player that came in and got inside the numbers and set for a full second just as the rule EXPLICITLY says he has to do to be legal.  A hideout play the kid isn't inside the numbers, that's exactly why the rule says they have to come inside the numbers to not let them hideout on the sideline and so the defense sees them on the field.  Everyone in the stadium can see a kid run 9+ yards onto the field!  A hideout inside the numbers?  Absurd.  AND WRONG

[NVFOA_Ump]

Absurd.  AND WRONG

Did you even read 9-6-4-d?  If the timing of the substitution is designed to hide the player then it's IP.  That's 100% clear in the Rule Book and the Case Book.  We're not really worried about "everyone in the stadium".

[refjeff]

And his response will be there was no illegal substitution... 

  There wasn't a false start or OPI either, but that doesn't really matter.

 The foul is illegal participation.

[lawdog]

Get a clue.  You guys are saying the substitution is the illegal participation.  Try to follow along.  And you are still wrong.

[refjeff]

Get a clue. You guys are saying the substitution is the illegal participation.  Try to follow along.  And you are still wrong.

  Here it is.

Check out case play 3.7.5 Sit A. "Furthermore the act of coming on the field must not deceive the defensive team."

(credit to Stripes50)

[NVFOA_Ump]

Get a clue.  You guys are saying the substitution is the illegal participation.  Try to follow along.  And you are still wrong.

No need for clues.  The NFHS has by clear rule made this play Illegal Participation, not Illegal Substitution.  The rule and the case play referenced above are very clear and pretty easy to understand.  This is a simple hideout play, nothing more, nothing less.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Or maybe it's easier to get a clue by reading only that part of 9-6-4-d applicable to this specific play?

[GoodScout]

Gang, you can keep trying to make excuses for hideout plays all day. The rulebook and casebook are very clear about it.

And when you excuse it and give it a pass on the field, you just ensure we're going to see more and more of it.

Throw the flag. Call IP. Shut it down. And let's force the coaches to teach their players to play the game of football, not acting.

[Ralph Damren]

IMHO, this can often be stopped before it starts...In you pre-game meeting with the coach, ask :

"COACH, DO YOU HAVE ANY UNUSUAL PLAYS THAT WE SHOULD BE READY FOR SO WE CAN GIVE YOU PROPER COVERAGE  ??"

Don't use the term 'trick plays' and explain that we  need to know so we can cover it properly and can let you know if you can't. 

[ElvisLives]

IMHO, this can often be stopped before it starts...In you pre-game meeting with the coach, ask :

"COACH, DO YOU HAVE ANY UNUSUAL PLAYS THAT WE SHOULD BE READY FOR SO WE CAN GIVE YOU PROPER COVERAGE  ??"

Don't use the term 'trick plays' and explain that we  need to know so we can cover it properly and can let you know if you can't. 

I have done that every game for probably 35 of my 50 seasons on the field. To put it bluntly, they don’t tell us, or they just flat-out lie. We simply have to a) know the rules and interpretations, b) be alert at all times, and not be afraid to make a call that we know will generate objections; objections which are almost always based in lack of knowledge of the rules, incorrect explanations of rules from other sources, or, sadly, failure of some of our fellow officials to enforce the rules. That can be due to lack of knowledge/training of our officials, or fear of being excluded from working future games for those institutions (in those “jurisdictions” that allow institutions to select the officials for their games).
Keep the faith. Care enough to know the rules and interpretations thoroughly, and have the courage to make the calls that are needed to keep the games fair for the most important people involved in all sports - the players. Forget the coaches. Forget the fans. Do it for the players, at whatever level you may be working.

[lawdog]

Or maybe it's easier to get a clue by reading only that part of 9-6-4-d applicable to this specific play?

So genius this isn't illegal participation becuase of the substitution?  If they break the huddle and they line up in the same spot you still calling it a hideout?

[lawdog]

Gang, you can keep trying to make excuses for hideout plays all day.

This isn't one though.  Hard to hide inside the 9 yard marks.