|
You might be right about it being an illegal snap. We have the requirement that "2-40-2...In a snap, the movement must be a quick and continuous backward motion of the ball during which the ball immediately leaves the hand(s)
of the snapper..."
This original play had a motion that may or may not have been quick. It is hard to say exactly what is quick.
It appeared to be a continuous motion though some may feel it wasn't. I know they tried to make it continuous.
It was a backward motion. Our rule definitions say that if a movement with the ball is not forward then it is backward. This ball movement was not forward so it had to be backward.
Did the ball immediately leave the snapper's hand? At the end of his motion he gave it to a back and didn't hold on to it for a while. I believe it did leave his hand immediately upon reaching the back.
So I feel the only question about this snap is if you call it quick. I have always felt this was a legal snap. Perhaps you don't and that is fine. They checked it all out with the officials that night and it was decided that it was all legal then. Rules were changed/clarified after that night. And though we know the play is now clearly illegal today it is much less clear that it was illegal that night. The rules writers may like to think it was illegal back then but obviously is wasn't clear enough to those enforcing the rules to keep them from running that play.
|