Poorly Written Six Player Exceptions

[Legacy Zebra]

There are two exceptions that I believe need to be edited, both regarding potential fouls. Maybe somebody at the state meeting this weekend could get an answer. Even better, maybe we could get TASO or UIL to actually put something in writing.

In exception #13, it says “If the snap is muffed and a Team A player catches or recovers the ball beyond the neutral zone, he may not advance it. ENFORCEMENT: Loss of down from previous spot”.

Is this a foul? Or is the ball just brought back to the previous spot similar to a forward fumble? It says “enforcement” whereas other fouls say “penalty”.

3rd and 4 from the B-30. A1 muffs the snap and recovers while grounded at the B-29. B99 was in the neutral zone at the snap.

Are these offsetting fouls and we replay 3rd down? Or is B99’s DOF the only foul and Team A will get a new series at the B-25?






Exception 17 says that a pass to the snapper must travel 1 yard in flight, but then does not a give a penalty, foul name, or enforcement. Is it illegal touching against the snapper? Or is it an illegal pass by the passer? A incomplete pass similar to a passer catching his own pass? Something else?

1st and 15 at the A-6. While under pressure in his end zone, passer A11 throws a forward pass to snapper A55. The pass does not travel 1 yard in flight. A55 runs to the A-10 where he is tackled.

Illegal touching, 2/18 @ A-3? Illegal touching, 2/15 @ A-6? Illegal forward pass, safety? Incomplete pass, 2/15 @ A-6?

[JasonTX]

I'm just now seeing this.  We have always just brought the ball back to the previous spot.  No flag is thrown.  But, if that player picks the ball up and advances, then we put a flag down.

Play situation III has a play regarding the snapper catching a pass.  In that play they use the word "Legal" since the ball traveled more than a yard.  My assumption is that if it was less than a yard, then we'd have an illegal pass so a flag.

TXMike, what say you?

[dammitbobby]

3rd and 4 from the B-30. A1 muffs the snap and recovers while grounded at the B-29. B99 was in the neutral zone at the snap.

As I understand it, this situation involves a violation and a foul.  Violation would be trumped by the foul.  Now had he not been grounded, and attempted to advance it, the violation would turn into a foul, and with a foul by both teams, offset, replay.


(note:  you referenced the following as Exception 17, it is number 18 this year, not sure what year rule exceptions you are reading, but it's not the most current one) EDIT: There seem to be multiple versions floating around?? https://www.spczebras.org/football/forms/2023_UIL_Exceptions_6_Man.pdf and the TASO site where these are posted are not the exact same doc as what was given in the breakout session.  Numbering is off, text at top of second page is different between the two, etc.  Looks like handout just removed the redlined text, the other versions keep it in.  Even if all the text is the same, it will be super confusing to have both floating around, JMO. (Imagine the confusion when two officials are discussing something in the doc, and one says, see the top of the second page, that's what I'm talking about, and it's different text at the top of the second page for them.)

1st and 15 at the A-6. While under pressure in his end zone, passer A11 throws a forward pass to snapper A55. The pass does not travel 1 yard in flight. A55 runs to the A-10 where he is tackled.

I asked about this (although not in the EZ) and didn't get a crystal clear response.  It was pointed out that this would be an exceptionally rare situation, given the passing motion roughly would take one yard, and it would be treated as a violation.  Now how that is enforced from the EZ, I'm not sure.  There isn't any enforcement or penalty statement attached.  LOD? Replay the down?  Safety, since in EZ?  I don't know.  Off the top of my head I can't think of another Team A violation that would occur in the own EZ. 

My guess is this was probably intended to prevent the snapper from immediately turning around and getting the ball 'passed' (i.e., handed forward) to him.  I would think this would have to be a pretty blatant attempt at that, for me to call this under the 1-yard pass rule exception.  I wouldn't be surprised if this is as rare as the unicorn one-point safety.

 

[JasonTX]

3rd and 4 from the B-30. A1 muffs the snap and recovers while grounded at the B-29. B99 was in the neutral zone at the snap.

As I understand it, this situation involves a violation and a foul.  Violation would be trumped by the foul.  Now had he not been grounded, and attempted to advance it, the violation would turn into a foul, and with a foul by both teams, offset, replay.


(note:  you referenced the following as Exception 17, it is number 18 this year, not sure what year rule exceptions you are reading, but it's not the most current one) EDIT: There seem to be multiple versions floating around?? https://www.spczebras.org/football/forms/2023_UIL_Exceptions_6_Man.pdf and the TASO site where these are posted are not the exact same doc as what was given in the breakout session.  Numbering is off, text at top of second page is different between the two, etc.  Looks like handout just removed the redlined text, the other versions keep it in.  Even if all the text is the same, it will be super confusing to have both floating around, JMO. (Imagine the confusion when two officials are discussing something in the doc, and one says, see the top of the second page, that's what I'm talking about, and it's different text at the top of the second page for them.)

1st and 15 at the A-6. While under pressure in his end zone, passer A11 throws a forward pass to snapper A55. The pass does not travel 1 yard in flight. A55 runs to the A-10 where he is tackled.

I asked about this (although not in the EZ) and didn't get a crystal clear response.  It was pointed out that this would be an exceptionally rare situation, given the passing motion roughly would take one yard, and it would be treated as a violation.  Now how that is enforced from the EZ, I'm not sure.  There isn't any enforcement or penalty statement attached.  LOD? Replay the down?  Safety, since in EZ?  I don't know.  Off the top of my head I can't think of another Team A violation that would occur in the own EZ. 

My guess is this was probably intended to prevent the snapper from immediately turning around and getting the ball 'passed' (i.e., handed forward) to him.  I would think this would have to be a pretty blatant attempt at that, for me to call this under the 1-yard pass rule exception.  I wouldn't be surprised if this is as rare as the unicorn one-point safety.

My issue with the AR is that it uses an example of a pass that travels more than one yard and says it is a Legal Pass.  If it doesn't travel yard then we'd have the opposite, and that would be Illegal Pass.  Foul or no foul?  Incomplete pass or what do we do with it?

[Legacy Zebra]

3rd and 4 from the B-30. A1 muffs the snap and recovers while grounded at the B-29. B99 was in the neutral zone at the snap.

As I understand it, this situation involves a violation and a foul.  Violation would be trumped by the foul.  Now had he not been grounded, and attempted to advance it, the violation would turn into a foul, and with a foul by both teams, offset, replay.

That is a fair interpretation. I don’t think a player simply recovering a bad snap should offset a foul. But my point is that we don’t know. At best it’s vague and left for us to guess. If we had an official ruling in writing, it would be cleared up. We just need to add an AR to the existing document.

1st and 15 at the A-6. While under pressure in his end zone, passer A11 throws a forward pass to snapper A55. The pass does not travel 1 yard in flight. A55 runs to the A-10 where he is tackled.

I asked about this (although not in the EZ) and didn't get a crystal clear response.  It was pointed out that this would be an exceptionally rare situation, given the passing motion roughly would take one yard, and it would be treated as a violation.  Now how that is enforced from the EZ, I'm not sure.  There isn't any enforcement or penalty statement attached.  LOD? Replay the down?  Safety, since in EZ?  I don't know.  Off the top of my head I can't think of another Team A violation that would occur in the own EZ. 

My guess is this was probably intended to prevent the snapper from immediately turning around and getting the ball 'passed' (i.e., handed forward) to him.  I would think this would have to be a pretty blatant attempt at that, for me to call this under the 1-yard pass rule exception.  I wouldn't be surprised if this is as rare as the unicorn one-point safety.

Yeah, I’m guessing this was just put in there so that teams can’t pass the ball back between the snapper’s legs since handing it is illegal. It’s probably just to close that loophole. But again, we’re guessing at enforcement. And the rarity of a play shouldn’t preclude having an enforcement ready. To your comment about the 1 point safety, it’s an incredibly rare play. I think there’s only been something like 8 total in college football history. If you think about how many tries have been played since 1958 when the rule was added, that’s an incredibly small number. But we still have a ruling for if it happens. I don’t really care what the ruling is, we just need to have one.

[dammitbobby]

4/1 @ B25.  A22 receives the snap, then fumbles at the B28.  A45 recovers the ball and is grounded at the B19. Ruling?

I'd have B's ball 1/10 @B28. 

However.

The exception is clear that 1) the ball cannot be advanced until an exchange is completed, and 2) the 4th down fumble rule is also not in effect until an exchange is completed.  And the penalty statement for the ball being advanced is 5 yards + LOD.  So in this case, would it be B's ball 1/10 @ B32? (Yes, I know I said earlier in this thread, but seeing another post on another forum got me thinking... dangerous, I know)

Does a fumble bouncing around that happens to go forward count as being advanced? Or is advanced an intentional act?  We wouldn't say that on any other down, a ball that is fumbled was advanced to the spot of recovery by the fumbler.

Why do we penalize 5 yards in 6-man for a fumble bouncing forward on 4th down, but not 11-man? 

[Legacy Zebra]

It would be at the B-30. 5 yards from previous spot.

Does a fumble bouncing around that happens to go forward count as being advanced? Or is advanced an intentional act?  We wouldn't say that on any other down, a ball that is fumbled was advanced to the spot of recovery by the fumbler.

Take 4th down out of it. Say this play occurred on 3rd down. You wouldn’t let A keep the ball up there. There was no exchange prior to the ball crossing the neutral zone. Team A has advanced the ball and did not complete an exchange prior to the all crossing the neutral zone (and it was not kicked or forward passes). So if we know that the 4DFR doesn’t apply because there was no legal exchange, then nothing changes when we go back to 4th down. It’s still an illegal advancement.

As to your final question, because that’s the rule? Why can 11-man teams QB sneak on 4th and 1 but 6-man teams can’t? Because that’s the rule. 

[dammitbobby]

As to your final question, because that’s the rule? Why can 11-man teams QB sneak on 4th and 1 but 6-man teams can’t? Because that’s the rule.

That's a fair answer, I guess.    At least for QB sneaks, there's other elements involved (must have exchange, etc) other than just the way the ball doinks.

[Legacy Zebra]

Is there a way or place to officially submit questions like these to TASO?  I know Mike posts here occasionally but it would be nice to have to rely on a message board post to get answers in these situations.

[dammitbobby]

I would imagine the standard answer is to run it through your district director.

[JasonTX]

Is there a way or place to officially submit questions like these to TASO?  I know Mike posts here occasionally but it would be nice to have to rely on a message board post to get answers in these situations.

football@taso.org