View Single Post
  #58 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 13, 2010, 11:44am
mbyron mbyron is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
How about 7-1-7b

Hut-Hut-HutHutt!

b. Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach.

I have heard many officials say that snap count falls under this but I say, snap count is not an ACT. It is verbiage, now if the team runs a play that is just snap counts and no snap, that ACT was clearly designed to draw B into the NZ.
Of course the snap count is an act. The rule should prohibit acts whose ONLY purpose is to cause B to encroach. Since a snap count is part of the sequence leading to a snap, and since teams are legally permitted to vary their snap count, this kind of deception is not a violation of the rules.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote