illegal formation?

[kentref]

Think about what 3-7-3 says. In this case A11 is a player and continues to be a player until he is replaced. Even though he went off the field during a dead ball period he was not "replaced" by another player, therefore you could argue that he is still a player. As long as he was within the numbers before he left the field, then it doesn't matter if he doesn't get within the numbers when he comes back on the field, unless ... there is some deception and he doesn't draw coverage. Then I would probably flag it as illegal participation (9-6-4d). Otherwise I don't think I'd flag it at all.

Originally posted by kentref


Think about what 3-7-3 says. In this case A11 is a player and continues to be a player until he is replaced. Even though he went off the field during a dead ball period he was not "replaced" by another player, therefore you could argue that he is still a player. As long as he was within the numbers before he left the field, then it doesn't matter if he doesn't get within the numbers when he comes back on the field, unless ... there is some deception and he doesn't draw coverage. Then I would probably flag it as illegal participation (9-6-4d). Otherwise I don't think I'd flag it at all.

kentref,
Good point! I was looking at it as when he left the field he then wouldn't be considered a player any longer. My mistake.

[andy1033]

This is a play on the federation website very similar to this, it is legal. It says a player who leaves thinking he is the 12 player and renters is ok. Can not do this to decieve. I assume he was inside the 9 yd marker with the rfp.

[Edited by andy1033 on Oct 2nd, 2005 at 07:09 PM]

[wisref2]

See casebook play 3.7.3 Situation A - AS CORRECTED BY THE NATIONAL FEDERATION (SEE THEIR WEBSITE)

(I've removed some of the situation in the play below to make is simpler to read)

B11 mistakenly believes he is his team's 12th player and leaves the field before the snap....on his sideline and enters his team box. B11 then discovers his error and returns to field on his team's side of the neutral zone before the snap.

Ruling (corrected) The activity is legal, but if done intentionally to gain an advantage it would be an unsportsmanlike foul. If B11 returns to the field after the snap it a live ball foul for illegal participation.

[yankeesfan]

Originally posted by andy1033
This is a play on the federation website very similar to this, it is legal. It says a player who leaves thinking he is the 12 player and renters is ok. Can not do this to decieve. I assume he was inside the 9 yd marker with the rfp.

[Edited by andy1033 on Oct 2nd, 2005 at 07:09 PM]

i dont see how he can get a free pass for leaving the field and coming back into the game and not having to be between the numbers just by being on the field at the RFP. when he returns, he should have to get between the numbers or have a live ball illegal formation. i called our local interpreter and he said he asked our state interpreter the same question about 3 weeks ago and he said he has to get between the numbers when he returns. the better clean this rule up a little bit.

[waltjp]

Originally posted by tpaul

I wasn't talking about the illegal formation. A11 withdrew and re-enter. Shouldn't that be illegal substitution? [/B]

The player thought he was the 12th man and left the field. He wasn't replaced. Wasn't there a question like this on the test?

As for the 9-yard rule. A player must be within the 9-yard marks after the RFP. If he left the huddle after the RFP and went to the sideline, realized that he wasn't replace and lined up outside the 9-yard marks, has he met the requirement?

[yankeesfan]

Originally posted by waltjp

The player thought he was the 12th man and left the field. He wasn't replaced. Wasn't there a question like this on the test?

As for the 9-yard rule. A player must be within the 9-yard marks after the RFP. If he left the huddle after the RFP and went to the sideline, realized that he wasn't replace and lined up outside the 9-yard marks, has he met the requirement?

[/B]

are you saying this should be a dead ball illegal substitution? what are you saying if not? i can tell you this is not an illegal sub. for sure.

[wisref2]

Yankeesfan, I can agree with your logic but there is no rule support. 7-2-1 is pretty clear: "After the ball is ready for play, each player of A who participated in the previous down and each substitute for A must have been, momentarily, between the 9-yard marks, before the snap."

In this case, the player met the requirements. He was within the 9-yard marks at the ready for play. What he does after that doesn't matter.

[yankeesfan]

well i cant say i agree, but i guess thats what i am going to go by for now on. the only thing that is important here is to make sure it is definetly the same player who came out of the game returns to the game and not someone else. have to keep a good eye on that. if a different player comes into the game and doesn't get in between the numbers than you will have a live ball illegal formation.

[waltjp]

Originally posted by tpaul

walt,
he didn't line up correctly. he wasn't inside the mark. If a player lines up in the "no-man land" (neither on or off the LOS) That player has committed a illegal formation foul which makes him an ineligible, correct?

Tom, I found this.

From the Redding Guide - Example 3-10

With less than two minutes remaining in the first half, Team A is in a hurry-up offense. End A89, runs a long pass pattern and does not return to his team's huddle. He remains outside the nine-yard marks and goes to a position near the sideline after the ready. On the next play, A89 catches a pass. Ruling: Foul on A89 for an illegal formation; 5 yard penalty from the previous spot.

There's no mention of an ineligble here.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by tpaul
I wasn't talking about the illegal formation. A11 withdrew and re-enter. Shouldn't that be illegal substitution?

REPLY: tpaul...I don't think so, since he was never a replaced player and no substitute reported in for him. I think the most equitable way to handle it is a violation of 9-6-4d: using a player (in this case) in a pretended substitution...

Originally posted by waltjp

Tom, I found this.

From the Redding Guide - Example 3-10

With less than two minutes remaining in the first half, Team A is in a hurry-up offense. End A89, runs a long pass pattern and does not return to his team's huddle. He remains outside the nine-yard marks and goes to a position near the sideline after the ready. On the next play, A89 catches a pass. Ruling: Foul on A89 for an illegal formation; 5 yard penalty from the previous spot.

There's no mention of an ineligble here.

Walt,
We have two different questions running in this thread.

1- if a player leaves the field and isn't replaced but re-enters ...no foul, I agree with. I scr

------------------------------------------------

2- Illegal formation: 7-2-3

ART. 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 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. (See 2-30-3)

Doesn't an eligible player have to be on the end of the line or in the back field? Doesn't that make this player ineligible? An if an ineligible player goes down field, OPI?

yes/no?

If yes to the above. Then if a player doesn't make it inside the 9 yard mark and causes a illegal formation call. Doesn't that make him an ineligible player?

Originally posted by Bob M.

REPLY: tpaul...I don't think so, since he was never a replaced player and no substitute reported in for him. I think the most equitable way to handle it is a violation of 9-6-4d: using a player (in this case) in a pretended substitution...

Thanks Bob I understand my mistake on that one...

[waltjp]

Thomas,

If you look at the example I cited from Redding's you'll see that it's an illegal formation and not an ineligible downfield. In the example A89 was not inside the 9-yard marks after the RFP and ended up catching a TD. If he was ineligible you'd have that plus OPI. The only infraction was an illegal formation.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: But Walt...I think this play is different. In Redding's play the WR in question was NEVER inside the 9-yd marks after the RFP. I'm assuming that in the posted play, he was inside when the RFP sounded, but had a brain cramp and left thinking he was now the 12th guy out there.