|
I can't view the video, but the spirit of the false start rule is to mitigate some of the advantage team A has of knowing the snap count, by giving assurance to team B that if certain movements are made by A, they're either illegal or a reliable sign that the ball is in play. So did the 2nd player's movement look as if it would lead the opponents to believe the ball was being put in play? If not, I'd let it go and give team A a chance to complete their (unplanned) shift, or to call time out, or to snap the ball and give team B the opp'ty to accept or decline an illegal motion call.
If you're saying the player "obviously missed the snap count" (my emphasis), then you're saying his action was so closely associated with his usual action at the snap as to lead the other team to believe the ball was snapped, therefore false start. But if that's not so obvious, then illegal motion if the ball's snapped during the shift or less than a second after everyone resets. If a player of B encroaches in apparent rxn, then you can use that as evidence of a false start and negate the encroachment call; but that's not an open-and-shut case, because it's common for team A to start one back moving, then shift another back, to maintain the deception of the usual MIM, and will sometimes draw an opponent offside in a way that's ruled legal. The rulebook phrases "quick, jerky movement" vs. "smooth and rhytmic" helps a little, but this is one of the most judgement-and-custom-infused area of the rules, and I'm sure some officials will be more favorable to team A and others to team B, because the rulesmakers have in effect said you're allowed to fool the defense a certain amount but no more. Of course being more generous to team A concerning what's a false start can wind up being more generous to team B by producing a live ball foul instead, depending on how team A reacts to their own miscue, but I don't think the officials should anticipate that.
Robert
|