Mixed Interp: Illegal Motion / Shift

[ljudge]

I have seen (published) two separate interpretations regarding illegal shift.

Play 1)

All A players are set for a full second and A81 goes in motion. #81 was moving parallel to the LOS and set for LESS THAN a second when the ball is snapped.

Ruling - because all players had been set for a second (including A81 before he went in motion) this play would be legal because even though A81 set for less than a second he was considered to be in motion at the snap (by previously published interp).

Play 2)

Same as play #1 except not all players were set when A81 went in motion.

Ruling - it's an illegal shift but NOT because of #81 being set for less than a second, but rather because not all players were set before A81 went in motion.

I know you want to know where I saw this. A recent edition of referee had a conflict with the ruling in play #1 above. I called this an illegal shift as a cadet and was blasted on my comment card from varsity officials becasue I didn't know the rules. I was told this was considered to be in motion and not an illegal shift.

The reason I'm putting this out there is to see what others have read in the past and how you rule on this. Meanwhile, I'll look for this interp. When I read this in Referee I expecting them to publish play #1 as being legal due to what I read in the past.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

I believe that, by the book, play #1 should result in a flag. A shift is defined as a player or players moving from one set position to another set position. If the motion man resets, then his motion was a shift. Somewhere in rule 7, it says that after a shift or huddle, all 11 players must be set. Thus, your play is an illegal shift, and that is how it is called around here - a motion man who gets to his spot too quickly needs to keep moving (usually by running in place) until the snap.

Originally posted by ljudge
I have seen (published) two separate interpretations regarding illegal shift.

Play 1)

All A players are set for a full second and A81 goes in motion. #81 was moving parallel to the LOS and set for LESS THAN a second when the ball is snapped.

Ruling - because all players had been set for a second (including A81 before he went in motion) this play would be legal because even though A81 set for less than a second he was considered to be in motion at the snap (by previously published interp).

Play 2)

Same as play #1 except not all players were set when A81 went in motion.

Ruling - it's an illegal shift but NOT because of #81 being set for less than a second, but rather because not all players were set before A81 went in motion.

I know you want to know where I saw this. A recent edition of referee had a conflict with the ruling in play #1 above. I called this an illegal shift as a cadet and was blasted on my comment card from varsity officials becasue I didn't know the rules. I was told this was considered to be in motion and not an illegal shift.

The reason I'm putting this out there is to see what others have read in the past and how you rule on this. Meanwhile, I'll look for this interp. When I read this in Referee I expecting them to publish play #1 as being legal due to what I read in the past.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: For play #1 I agree with Roamin' Ump. Since A81 stopped (reset) after his motion, he is no longer in motion, but rather he has shifted to a new set position. After a shift, all 11 players must be set for a full second prior to the snap--including A81 himself.

For play #2, it is also an illegal shift. But contrary to the ruling you posted, it is precisely because--just like play #1--A81 was not set for a second prior to the snap. The fact that all linemen were not set for a second prior to A81's motion is not material since A81 did stop and reset. If A81 had continued in motion up to the snap, then that would have been the reason to flag the illegal shift.

Those who told you that #1 was legal are mistaken. Some time back (I'm guessing about 15+ years ago) #1 would have been legal. And it's still legal in NCAA since a shift is defined differently there. But it's no longer legal in Federation.

[mcrowder]

I thought your rules required that a shift was 2 or more people.

[irefky]

Just as Bob said, all 11 must be set for a full second prior to the snap for A.

go to your case book and read section 2.37 on shifts, 2004 book

[ljudge]

I found the publication. It was on the 2002 Fed Web site.

Roman Umpire / Bob: Check this out. I believe this would make Play #1 legal.

SITUATION 8: Team A comes to the line of scrimmage and is motionless for at least one second. Back, A2 legally goes in motion and stops just prior to the ball being snapped. RULING: No foul. A2 is considered to be in motion at the snap. (7-2-7)

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by mcrowder
I thought your rules required that a shift was 2 or more people.

REPLY: mcrowder...it used to be. It was just like the NCAA rule. But they changed it about 12-15 years ago so that a shift is now movement of one or more players to a new set position.

[booker227]

Wouldn't it be simplier to delineated between the two by saying that an illegal motion penalty would result after A has taken their set position and at the time of the snap, while an illegal shift penalty takes place after A has broken the huddle and taken their set positions?