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.