View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 17, 2001, 09:12pm
BktBallRef BktBallRef is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by devdog69
Ok, first of all, when I made my comment I did not take into account the shouting of "go" into the equation. That little tidbit would change my perception of the intent quite a bit. I agreee that if the intent is to simulate the snap then I would have a foul. I was just saying that going from a two point stance to three was not, in itself, a foul in my mind. However, now after looking back over the comments I have a question for BsktBallRef. Tony, right? On one hand you mad this comment on the play: "There's nothing illegal about this shift unless an official judges that the offense is attempting to get the defense to encroach." But then you seem to convince yourself and then attempt to convince others by quoting the "bball bible". I think we agree but maybe not. My position is and has always been that if " In all cases, if the movement simulates the start of a play, it is a false start." However, going from a 2 to 3 point stance is not illegal, in and of itself.
I'm not sure I follow everything you said. But yes, I've said all along, if they simulate action at the snap, it's a false start. We, as officials, have to make that judgment. We also have to judge whether any movement by A is an attempt to get B to encroach.

Hopefully, that clears whatever I needed to clarify. BTW, what's a "bball bible?"
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote