Thread: Legal?
View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 13, 2009, 02:56pm
Robert Goodman Robert Goodman is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN View Post
I'm really ambivalent about flagging this for RTS, but I'm also looking at the spirit and intent of the rule.

The snapper is protected because he's not in a position to protect himself. If a 200+ pound linebacker is stepping in the middle of his back, isn't this something we should be protecting the snapper from?
Maybe, but I don't think that was the intent of the RTS provision. It was installed to counter the intimidation factor of teams that would sacrifice some of their rush just to make the snapper think he has to protect himself against something he can't see, and therefore he'll hurry the snap, or snap with his head up or raising it too soon, and not have good form. Since being stepped on the back of was never part of that intimidation factor, it would take a separate rule to outlaw. Even if the snapper had his head up, there's nothing he could do about being stepped on, so the threat of it wouldn't mess up his form. A rusher who timed the snap perfectly could do the same even to a snapper in regular formation -- or for that matter any other OL in 3- or 4-pt.

Seems to outlaw this danger the simplest thing would be to amend the definition of hurdling to include a snapper who hadn't had time to get out of a 3- or 4-pt. stance. But then why just the snapper?

Robert

Last edited by Robert Goodman; Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 03:17pm.
Reply With Quote