Rules Language

[ElvisLives]

Another document with gaps (attached).

Fair Catch Kick
-Does the kicker have protection for 5-yards or until the ball touches the ground/player/official?
-Is Team A restricted from blocking opponents in any way? (Assuming they are prohibited from touching the ball until it is touched by an opponent - as with a normal scrimmage kick - then it seems like they would not have this restriction).

SKF and Numbering Exceptions
          ^
89 88 87 86 85 84 83


 33 34     35


          12
Is 89 eligible? Strict reading of the rule kinda sounds like he is not, but, he isn't really an exception to mandatory numbering, since he is the end on that end of the line. I wish the rule specified if an uncovered "2x2" player may be eligible, if wearing an eligible number. I hope NOT, but we need to know for sure.

[dammitbobby]

I don't know about the first two, but in my reading of the rule, 89 is not eligible, he is part of the 2x2 numbering exception requirement, and the 5 linemen are not eligible. I don't see being on the end of the line overriding the specificity of this rule.  JMO though.

[Whodatboy18]

If you are part of the 2x2 numbering exception, you are ineligible by position. Doesn’t matter if you are uncovered or have an eligible number. Steve Shaw’s video on the change is a great resource.

[bossman72]

Agree, 89 is ineligible.

[ElvisLives]

Yeah, I meant to check the video before I commented. Play No. 2 seems to support that an uncovered “2x2” player is inelgible, even if wearing an eligible number. I’m all for this. I just wish Shaw would have included: “2x2” players are ineligible by position, even if on the end of the line and wearing an eligible number.”

Speaking of Play Number No. 2, listen to what Shaw says regarding that formation. When talking about the player on the right end of the line, he says:
“…leaving the right tackle uncovered. This is now legal since the 5 players in the “2x2” formation are ineligible by rule, they do not have to be covered up.”

“…now…”? What is he talking about? In NCAA rules, no player has ever had to be ‘covered,’ even in an SKF. In any formation, as long as Team A has 5 linemen 50-79, or has legal ‘exceptions’ to mandatory numbering, both ends can be 50-79. No player, by number or position, has ever had to be covered.
Where is that coming from?
Geez.

[TxJim]

Well, as I was hoping we got 7-1-4-1-5-b eliminated in the text of Mr. Shaw's latest message.
 
But now don't we now have some amorphous terms that need clarification and definition for coaches and officials??
In the new 7-1-4-a-5, what is the definition of "lined up" and "line up" and "established" for players of the 2x2?

We have officiated by an OP that says "the intent of the scrimmage kick formation numbering exception is to allow teams to make substitutions that are not deceptive."

'Line' up or 'lined up' vs. 'established' example:

With 35 seconds on the running play clock A 4/10 A-35 2Q 6:57, Team A's punt team (mass substitution) moves onto the field toward the LOS with 10 players moving at different speeds to an apparent SKF as depicted at the snap below.
 1                     2 3 4 5 6 7
                         
                          9     10 11

                             12
The first to arrive is A4 the snapper, quickly followed by A2 A3, A5, and A7 arrive to the line to "line up (?)" at different times (as depicted) with A7 in or with a foot inside the right edge of the tackle box. A confused A6 comes from the Team area with a) 18 seconds or b) 5 seconds left on the play clock and quickly inserts himself standing between A5 and A7 and A7 takes a step to his right to accommodate A6 which places A7 outside the tackle box. A2 3,5, and 6 then take point stances and A4 snaps the ball. Ruling?

[ElvisLives]

Jim,
The key to this now seems to be when the Snapper is established. At this time, the linemen are not locked in until the Snapper is established. So, in your example, if the snapper has already stepped up to the line behind the ball before A6 moved onto the line, then the “2x2” Exceptions had already been established (A2, A3, A4, A5, A7), and Team A will commit a live-ball foul for an illegal formation at the snap, because original exception A7 changed position.
Now, it seems like the potential Snapper could stand back behind the line and wait until all of their players are in their desired positions. Then, when everyone else is where they need to be, he could move forward onto the line at the ball, thus, becoming established as the snapper, which, in turn, establishes the exceptions, and locks in the “2x2” players. Other exceptions outside the “2x2” may change/adjust their positions, but must be on the line, and between the ends, at the snap.

With this, it will be much more difficult for Team A to disguise eligible receivers.

[ElvisLives]

I made a mistake in my previous post, which I have corrected. I misidentified the 5 original exceptions (inadvertently having A6 instead of A7 as an original exception). I fixed that.