formation (NFHS)

[MI Official]

IN the NFHS there can be one back in position to receive a direct snap (only back to break plane of center). Question is this. the QB lines up with his hands under the Tackle (Guard), and there is a snap to the RB 5 yards behind the LOS. is this a legal formation?

[Warrenkicker]

No this is not a legal formation. The rule says that only one player may be in a position not on the line-of-scrimmage and breaking the waist of the player nearest to him who is on the line-of-scrimmage. This player must be in a position to take the snap. Otherwise illegal formation, live-ball foul, 5 yards from previous spot.

[mcrowder]

Is a player, lined up behind the tackle, breaking that plane? Unless the tackle is in the NZ, I don't think so. A player directly behind a tackle is simply a back. It's that slot behind the center - halfway in the backfield and halfway on the line, that can only be occupied by a player who receives the snap.

[KWH]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Is a player, lined up behind the tackle, breaking that plane? Unless the tackle is in the NZ, I don't think so. A player directly behind a tackle is simply a back. It's that slot behind the center - halfway in the backfield and halfway on the line, that can only be occupied by a player who receives the snap.

You are incorrect.
See 7-2-3 and 2-30-3

[cmathews]

The formation rule mentions a back breaking the plane of the waist of the "nearest lineman" not the center...

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by cmathews
The formation rule mentions a back breaking the plane of the waist of the "nearest lineman" not the center...

REPLY: That's precisely what puts him in an illegal position. In order to be a back he must not break the waistine of the closest player who is legally on the line.

[mcrowder]

What are you talking about?

A player lined up behing the tackle is not breaking the plane of anyone on the line. I'm obviously missing something in your description.

(PS - please don't just quote FED rule numbers - the rule itself would be helpful, as I have no FED book, and it's not on line).

[Warrenkicker]

The original question states that the QB has his hands under the tackle. In this position I would say that he is breaking the plane of the tackles waist and thus an illegal formation. I agree that if he is just lined up behind him that it is not an illegal formation.

[Huskerblue]

A side not to this: If the back is intentionally lining up behind the tackle to deceive the defense, you could have an UC penalty. Agree?

[mcrowder]

Why? If the quarterback fakes a handoff to the runningback, to deceive the defense, is that UC?

Or - if the offense shifts legally to disguise a potentially legal receiver in order to deceive the defense, is that UC?

Or does FED have some rule about using formation to deceive the defense (and if so, how is it worded and how would the 2nd paragraph above be any different from your QB behind the tackle)?

Now... back to the initial question.

The place that a player cannot be is the "slot" that breaks the plane of the ADJACENT player (meaning the tackle, in the case of the QB - NOT meaning the CENTER as stated above). This player is not a back (behind the plane of the tackle/guard/end's hips) and is not a lineman (in front of this plane). If you're reading this to mean a player cannot have his hands under the hips of the tackle, I believe you're misreading the rule (or, as is always possible here ... perhaps the FED rule is curiously and extensively different than NCAA - I don't believe this to be the case, since our rule also talks about "breaking the plane" of the player nearest him on the line.)

[cmathews]

7-2-3.....of the players of A who are not on their line at the snap only one may penetrate the vertical plane through the waistline of his nearest teammate who is on his line. He must have his hands in a position to receive the ball if it is snapped between the snapper's legs but he is not required to receive the snap. Any other player(s) must be in legal position as a back.... If the qb is lined up behind the tackle and his hands penetrate the vertical plane of his (the tackles) hips, and there is a snap from center, this is and illegal formation...

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by Huskerblue
A side not to this: If the back is intentionally lining up behind the tackle to deceive the defense, you could have an UC penalty. Agree?

REPLY: Not at all! All you have is an illegal formation if the ball is snapped while he still is in that position.

The Fed rule defines a lineman in almost an identical way to the NCAA. A back is defined as a Team A player not on the line who "...has no part of his body breaking the plane of an imaginary line drawn parallel to the line of scrimmage through the waist of the NEAREST teammate who is legally on the line." Since he has his hands under the tackles butt, I think that qualifies the tackle as his "nearest teammate legally on the line."

[Bob M.]

REPLY: I've been participating on these boards for a few years now and I'm frankly amazed at the number of things that some officials want to rule unsportsmanlike 'deception.' I truly mean no offense to Huskerblue, but as mcrowder pointed out, football is a game of deception--and not only by the offense. Even the defense can fake a blitz just prior to the snap to throw off the offense's blocking assignments. And how often do you see the defensive secondary line up in man coverage and drop into a zone just before or at the snap? The only three categories of deception that the Fed has explicitly ruled unfair are: (1) using a player, sub, or replaced player in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents at or immediately before the snap or free kick (a "hideout" play), (2) lying on the ground to deceive opponents at or immediately before the snap or free kick (see this one quite frequently ?!?!), and (3) using actions and/or language just before the snap to indicate that something is wrong and the snap is not imminent ("Where's the tee?"). And, by the way, the former two infractions are not unsportsmanlike conduct at all, but rather illegal participation. The latter is not specifically spelled out in the Fed rule book, but is rather prominently covered in the Case Book in play 9.9.3 Situation B and is defined as USC. The only two places where the words "deceive" or "deception" appear in the FED Rule Book are in the illegal participation rule (9-6) and when excusing a defensive player's hold on an offensive player pretending to be a runner (2-3). We've got to get over this notion--and spread the word--that any deception that is 'unusual' automatically qualifies it as USC. OK...off my soap box now.

[mcrowder]

CMat, I don't believe that's the intent of the rule. The intent of the rule is to prohibit players - other than a QB - from lining up in "no-man's land" - i.e. not a back, and not a lineman. The hands under the butt is NOT a violation of this. If you're reading the rule to imply that the player closest to the QB is the player he's got his hands under, I believe you're missing the point.

And in any case, if your hands are under a player's butt, from behind, you're not breaking the plane of his waist (unless he's standing up).

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Bob M.
REPLY: I've been participating on these boards for a few years now and I'm frankly amazed at the number of things that some officials want to rule unsportsmanlike 'deception.' I truly mean no offense to Huskerblue, but as mcrowder pointed out, football is a game of deception--and not only by the offense. Even the defense can fake a blitz just prior to the snap to throw off the offense's blocking assignments. And how often do you see the defensive secondary line up in man coverage and drop into a zone just before or at the snap? The only three categories of deception that the Fed has explicitly ruled unfair are: (1) using a player, sub, or replaced player in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents at or immediately before the snap or free kick (a "hideout" play), (2) lying on the ground to deceive opponents at or immediately before the snap or free kick (see this one quite frequently ?!?!), and (3) using actions and/or language just before the snap to indicate that something is wrong and the snap is not imminent ("Where's the tee?"). And, by the way, the former two infractions are not unsportsmanlike conduct at all, but rather illegal participation. The latter is not specifically spelled out in the Fed rule book, but is rather prominently covered in the Case Book in play 9.9.3 Situation B and is defined as USC. The only two places where the words "deceive" or "deception" appear in the FED Rule Book are in the illegal participation rule (9-6) and when excusing a defensive player's hold on an offensive player pretending to be a runner (2-3). We've got to get over this notion--and spread the word--that any deception that is 'unusual' automatically qualifies it as USC. OK...off my soap box now.

I second Bob's soapbox moment!

I'd like to add that I've often seen officials try to invoke the "unfair acts" rule for things that are specifically covered in the rules. In 6 years, I've NEVER seen anyone from my area invoke the unfair acts rule.