[RealityCheck]

NCAA officials signal 19 is listed with the National Federation description "Illegal procedure" as recently as the 2004 NCAA Football Rules. It is a valid general term for the various infractions enforced using signal 19.

There was no "could have had an illegal formation" because North Carolina in fact did have 5 players lined up in the backfield on the play in question. Off the line of scrimmage it had a wide receiver left, a slot receiver right, the quarterback, a holder, and a kicker. That issue is a red herring here though regarding illegal participation/substitution.

There were 17 North Carolina players on the field when the ball was snapped. Five of those players were attempting to leave the field before the ball was snapped, and all of those five were outside the numbers at the snap and when the ball was spiked. That is the live-ball illegal substitution foul that was called.

There were still 12 North Carolina players who were in the offensive formation between the numbers and not attempting to leave the field at the completion of the spike to stop the clock. Those 12 players all participated in that down...that is covered by the definition of "player" in Rule 2-27-6.

I listed the A.R. 9-1-5 articles since they are on point as to when illegal participation can be determined, and the exact play situation in A.R. 9-1-5-VII is not relevant. The play situation in A.R. 9-1-5-I covers exactly what occured on this play regarding participation...12 players on the field for a complete or incomplete forward pass. The pre-snap determination of illegal substitution for more than 11 players on the field was not made on this play as covered in A.R. 9-1-5-VII. That illegal substitution foul if called would have been enforced as a dead-ball foul, and more than one second would have been put back on the clock. Since that dead-ball foul call was not made, officials are still obligated to determine if more than 11 players participated in the down that was completed with the spike to stop the clock under the enforcement principle covered in A.R. 9-1-5-VII.

Both the live-ball illegal substitution foul for excess players leaving the field and illegal participation for 12 players participating in the play should have been reported on this play. Tennessee should have had the option to decline illegal formation, decline illegal substitution, and accept illegal participation. That is what the letter, spirit, and philosophy of the rules require.