I guess we can agree to disagree.
The 5 lineman for A are all bent over, with their forearms resting on just above their knees. When the ball is snapped, they suddenly go up and back up for pass protection. Legal play.
The 5 lineman for A are all bent over, with their forearms resting on just above their knees. Just before the ball is snapped, they suddenly go up, just as before, yell "Go!", and then go go back down. However, the action of going up, is the same as before when the ball was snapped, and the defense encroaches.
The shift simulated action as the snap. The initial action is the same as the first play. No difference. The play is designed to make the defense encroach.
If that's not how it's interpreted in your area, that's fine. The rule book is not always black and white. I think we all understand from reading this and other discussion boards, that there are different interpretations in different areas. It doesn't mean that anyone is wrong. But to me, the case book is clear. In all cases, if the movement simulates the start of a play, it is a false start. You don't see how it can but, evidently, someone on the NF rules committee thinks it can. Otherwise, there would have been no reason to insert the statement into the play, would there?
[Edited by BktBallRef on Oct 16th, 2001 at 10:13 AM]
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott
"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
|