Fed press release link

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bcl1127

7-1-6: Now stipulates that it is encroachment to strike the ball or the snapper’s hand/arm prior to the snapper releasing the ball.

Rationale: Defensive players are restricted from contacting the ball or the snapper’s hand(s) or arm(s) until the snapper has released the ball

I went by the wording of the press release:

In addition, now defensive players are restricted from contacting the ball prior to the end of the snap or making contact with the snapper’s hand(s) or arm(s) until the snapper has released the ball.

Where did your quote come from? I sure hope either the p.r. got it wrong, or they had 2nd thoughts after it came out, & adopted the wording you quoted.

[HLin NC]

A press release is merely a synopsis of the rule change. It isn't meant to be used to interpret the actual rule.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

A press release is merely a synopsis of the rule change. It isn't meant to be used to interpret the actual rule.

Of course, but where did bcl1127 get his summary statement?

[HLin NC]

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...-changes-2017/

[bcl1127]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...-changes-2017/

Beat me to it.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...-changes-2017/

Thanks. Now I'm wondering why Fed even cares about who advertises on game balls. Their "Rationale" isn't a rationale at all, just an elaboration.

[HLin NC]

Probably a preventative measure. Someone has either proposed it or it has been done. Imagine a football that looks like a Budweiser label, or a Coke can, or a McDonald's bag. Fed may just be trying to get out in front, for once.

[CT1]

I'm truly bothered that the Rules Committee has taken the time to adopt a rule concerning the loss of a prosthetic limb, yet still refuses to define the IB/OB status of an airborne player.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Probably a preventative measure. Someone has either proposed it or it has been done. Imagine a football that looks like a Budweiser label, or a Coke can, or a McDonald's bag. Fed may just be trying to get out in front, for once.

Doesn't make sense, considering they allow the leagues & schools themselves to advertise there, just not to rent the space out to others. If a state ass'n wants to do so, why would Fed care?

[slick rick]

Need to make it the same for all involved!