Tue Mar 08, 2005, 12:12pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,557
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim S
Quote:
Originally posted by ljudge
The verbage makes sense here and I would have got this wrong on a test question, until now. My question is if an A player who is 4 stinking feet beyond the LOS and never hit a team B player, are you going to rag him for being illegally downfield? It's not like he really gained any kind of advantage especially if he's supposed to be behind the LOS blocking for his QB. If he touches a pass or some how draws coverage I agree it should (and has) to be flagged. So with that as a backdrop I ask are we going to be that strict if he really hasn't gained an advantage?
|
I have to disagree with ljudge here. There is an advantage gained.
Go to the reason for the rule. It's to allow blocking on defensive players without restricting the lineman to wait for the defenders to come to them, NOT to allow players to start downfield.
If a defensive player sees that an offensive lineman has gone beyond the LOS and is not blocking, or at least attempting to block, then the defensive player may logically assume that either 1. the play is a running play, or 2. the offensive player will be charged with a foul.
Allowing players beyond the LOS who are not blocking may very definately affect the play. And you have no way to know when, or if, that happens...... except for maybe the yelling by the defense who saw the offending lineman and called off their pass coverage.
|
I have to agree with Jim, judging adv/disadv is too hard in this case.
|
Threaded Mode
