Numbering Exception

[mccormicw]

Was just reading through a previous thread on numbering exceptions.http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=12896.0  Very interesting and informational thread but doesn't answer  a question I have which is: If team A is in a legal scrimmage kick formation with the following numbers on the line    81 82 51 52 53 54       83, when a player (we'll say number 52 though it doesnt really matter) establishes himself as the snapper.  Subsequently, number 55 shifts from the slot (clearly not on the line originally) between 54 and 83 onto the line.  Number 81 simultaneously shifts into the backfield.  Legal formation?  Particularly asking about #82 who was established as a numbering exception but there are now 5 players number 50-79 on the line.

My personal opinion is that the rule states "any and all such players are exceptions to the numbering fule throughout the down and remain ineligible receivers unless they become eligible under Rule 7-3-5 (forward pass touched by official or a Team B player)" which seems to make number 82 ineligible regardless of changes to the formation.  What is less clear to me is if the player is ineligible and the formation is somehow legal or is the formation illegal. 

[bossman72]

Illegal formation.

82 went from covered to uncovered after the snapper touched the ball.

You can go from eligible to ineligible no problem.  But, if you go from ineligible to eligible, then it's a foul.

[Kalle]

This used to be a problem until the rule language was changed so that the numbering exceptions become exceptions when the snapper is established, remain so until the end of the down, and may not be in an eligible position at the snap. Like bossman72 said, you can add ineligibles but you cannot "shed" your ineligibility when you are a numbering exception.

[mccormicw]

If the player in position to receive the snap is at 9 yards the entire time, we have no penalty.  Correct?

[ElvisLives]

If the player in position to receive the snap is at 9 yards the entire time, we have no penalty.  Correct?

Very technically, that would be correct, because - very technically - they were never in a scrimmage kick formation, by very technical definition, and they had five linemen numbered 50-79 at the snap.

However, no rules editor, national coordinator, or conference coordinator I've ever known wanted officials to be very technical.  The idea is that a player positioned 10 yards behind the NZ looks like a potential punter.  Wouldn't look much different at 9 yards.  If the down/distance/score/time are right, and there is a guy that looks like an apparent punter at 9 yards behind the NZ - don't split that hair.  That's a scrimmage kick formation.  In my conversation with John Adams so many years ago regarding SKF, he was very clear that there was to be no tolerance of a team attempting to deceive the opponent by messing with numbering on a scrimmage kick.

Robert

[Kalle]

I'm often too technical, but here I fully agree with The King. The purpose of the numbering exception rule is to allow team A to put in more fast players to be able to more easily cover the kick return. Team A is not to be allowed to use this to confuse the defense.

[Etref]

Removed jibberish post

[ElvisLives]

Removed jibberish post

Sounded a lot like what we hear from the sidelines.

[Grant - AR]

Sounded a lot like what we hear from the sidelines.

Nah...there were no 4-letter words in it.