|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 09:36am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Since we've been discussing IS and IP, consider this play:
PLAY: A, 2-14 from B's 30. The ball is snapped. B13 then realizes that his team only has 10 men participating and comes running onto the field at the 50. A35 carries the ball to B's 27 where he is tackled. B13 is still way behind the play when the ball becomes dead. RULING: ???
__________________
Bob M. 
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 11:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Since the entering substitute didn't influence the play you have a live-ball illegal substitution foul (non-player version of the IS rule 3.7.1). This foul is enforced similar to USC which is a "non-player" foul marked off from the succeeding spot.
After the penalty is administered it's 3rd and 6 from the 22. See the "Penalty" section under rule 3 sec 7 (page 36) of last year's rules book.
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 01:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Maybe. What if B13 was the 11th player from the previous play who for some reason stepped off the field during the dead ball? Since there has been no subsitution, he is still a player.
__________________
Jim Schroeder Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2!
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 03:08pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Once he withdraws he can't come back unless there is an accepted penalty (the punter rule), a TO or a quarter change. Even if B only has 10 players, he's a subsitute.
In this year's points of emphasis, they harp on this.
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 04:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not exactly. I read this in a posted article somewhere...possibly in Referee. If a player goes off the field and was the 11th player when he went off he's still a player by definition, not a substitute. So he's allowed back in. Many officials think this is illegal but it's not. Actually, it's illegal if the player does it to gain an advantage such as pretended substitution therefore making the other team think he's left the game. So really it's an official's judgement. But agan he's still a player so he can technically re-enter.
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2004, 04:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I didn't address Jim S's comment. Because he's still a player by definition I'm guessing that if he's on the opponent's side of the LOS and the RFP has been given you may have an immediate dead-ball encroachment foul.
I guess????
|
|
Fri Jun 18, 2004, 06:35am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Mike Sears
|
|
Fri Jun 18, 2004, 01:50pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Bob M.
|
|
Fri Jun 18, 2004, 11:55pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Good Point LJ...
I would've sworn that this is a foul, but a player isn't replaced until his replacement becomes a player... Since there was no replacement, the 11th guy is still a player... The key part of 3-7 says, "... and no player shall withdraw and re-enter as a substitute unless ..." The book doesn't define withdraw, but this player in question is not re-entering as a substitute.. Therefore, in the original question, I would say that the player is guilty of encroachment as soon as the center touches the ball and the player is on the wrong side of the neutral zone... If the player was never on the wrong side of the neutral zone, everything seems to be okay... I can't find a rule to prevent him from stepping onto the field after the snap, either... Feel free to punch holes in the logic...
|
|
Sat Jun 19, 2004, 11:06am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Haven't looked in the rulebook so this may be incorrect.
You can have IP if the player does not come within 15 yards of the ball before the snap. Most likely a player running on the field has not come within the 15 yards.
|
|
Sat Jun 19, 2004, 12:20pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
PiggSkinn. Wouldn't call encroachment on this one. A player can get back to his side of the LOS even after the Ref blows the RFP. besides he may not be encroaching the NZ when the snapper placs his hands on the ball, he may be behind it.
__________________
Jim Schroeder Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2!
|
|
Sat Jun 19, 2004, 02:56pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Snake~Eyes - The 15 yard rule applies to A only... (7-2-1) Good thought, though...
Jim - I was going to get into the technicalities of encroachment after the last question was resolved, but since you brought it up... Encroachment refers to being illegally in the neutral zone, but makes no reference to being beyond it... (Except for free kicks, where encroachment is defined as being beyond the free kick line...) I have found nothing that states it is a foul to be on the opposite side of the neutral zone at the snap... So, by the strictest of interpretations, the 11th B player is not encroaching when he is on A's side of the ball... At the same time, he is not covered by the illegal substitution provisions (3-7) because he is not a substitute... So as long as he does not touch a player, touch the ball, give defensive signals, or cross the neutral zone to get back to his own side of the ball, he has committed no foul... Obviously, this isn't correct... Please, someone find a rule that covers this... (The only possibility I can come up with is by using 7-1-6 and adjusting the definition of "breaks the plane of the neutral zone" to include being beyond it...)
|
|
Sat Jun 19, 2004, 03:14pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
