Sleeper Play

[Grey Hare]

Rats..............
I guess you are right about that. I was looking too hard for something other than USC.

GH

[Jim D]

Because it clearly is an unfair act under rule 9.9.3, it can be called unsportsmanlike but penalized from the previous spot since this would be the equitable ruling. Reddings points this out.

[mcrowder]

I have no audio on the thing for some reason... so I'm assuming there was some sort of, "Coach, this is the wrong ball" or something of the sort. If not, this is no more illegal than the play where Andre Ware walked away from under center hollering at the WR, and the ball was snapped directly to "RB" David Klingler, with Ware sprinting down the field uncovered.

So assuming something verbal, I also have USC.

But those calling this snap illegal are WRONG in both codes. In fact, there is a team that snaps the ball like this quite often (usually to a shotgun QB though). The snap must be continuous, and backward - this snap was exactly that, and was actually quite common long ago.

[Jim D]

9.9.3 Situation B talks about the difference between creative plays and illegal acts. It says "...actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap isn't imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal."

To me, that tells me the Andre Ware play you describe would be illegal under NFHS rules.

PS - I didn't have audio either but watch the coach on the sideline holding up the "correct" ball for everyone to see.

[kdf5]

I'm not sure if the snap question is settled or not but the snap doesn't have to go through the snapper's legs, right? He can snap the ball from a sideways position as long as it meets the rules. Otherwise, this is still an illegal play.

[Warrenkicker]

Well I have the answer as to why this play was allowed.

This play is the play which caused the rule to be change a few years back to add the use of verbage as USC. This school is about 45 miles from me and plays 8-man which is why the field is shorter and narrower as well as there being fewer players out there. I have worked many games at it since then but it was not me working that game. I'm not even sure who the crew was. Before the game the coaches requested the officials look at this play and determine if it would be legal. They showed them the snap and explained what would happen. The officials determined that everything about it was legal to them. This was the second half kickoff and the crew knew that play was coming. They were only going to run it after a COP because of the "wrong ball" thing. The QB and the coach were on Letterman that next week because it was such an odd play. This got it enough national attention that the NF decided to make sure it would never be run again.

The snap was a continuous backward motion but it could easily be said that the ball didn't leave his hand immediately. And that year the use of verbage such as they did was not expressly prohibitted.

Today we know it is all illegal and now, as it is said, you know the rest of the story.

[Warrenkicker]

Just in case some of you missed this post from yesterday.

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

Well I have the answer as to why this play was allowed.

This play is the play which caused the rule to be change a few years back to add the use of verbage as USC. This school is about 45 miles from me and plays 8-man which is why the field is shorter and narrower as well as there being fewer players out there. I have worked many games at it since then but it was not me working that game. I'm not even sure who the crew was. Before the game the coaches requested the officials look at this play and determine if it would be legal. They showed them the snap and explained what would happen. The officials determined that everything about it was legal to them. This was the second half kickoff and the crew knew that play was coming. They were only going to run it after a COP because of the "wrong ball" thing. The QB and the coach were on Letterman that next week because it was such an odd play. This got it enough national attention that the NF decided to make sure it would never be run again.

The snap was a continuous backward motion but it could easily be said that the ball didn't leave his hand immediately. And that year the use of verbage such as they did was not expressly prohibitted.

Today we know it is all illegal and now, as it is said, you know the rest of the story.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I have no audio on the thing for some reason... so I'm assuming there was some sort of, "Coach, this is the wrong ball" or something of the sort. If not, this is no more illegal than the play where Andre Ware walked away from under center hollering at the WR, and the ball was snapped directly to "RB" David Klingler, with Ware sprinting down the field uncovered.

So assuming something verbal, I also have USC.

But those calling this snap illegal are WRONG in both codes. In fact, there is a team that snaps the ball like this quite often (usually to a shotgun QB though). The snap must be continuous, and backward - this snap was exactly that, and was actually quite common long ago.

You could clearly hear someone, the narrator said it was the center, yelling that they had the wrong ball.

[PSU213]

My first comment is shame on the coach for trying this. Second, shame on the officials for letting this one go.

My other thought is this...I'm not really of the mindset to dissect whether the snap was legal or not, as we do not need any technicality to penalize the use of this play. It became illegal when the "wrong ball" strategy was used. If it is not a legal snap, why let the coach feel that this play will somehow become legal just by revising how the ball is snapped? He needs to get the message that this type of play is clearly illegal.

Futhermore, A has come up to the line of scrimmage. If it is an approved ball (going under the assumption that that umpire "tests" the footballs pregame), why would it even matter if this wasn't the ball they wanted? Maybe they have a kicking ball, etc., but if the ball is legal, approved, etc., and they are coming up for the snap, it really does not matter whether or not this is the exact ball that they want.

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by PSU213

Futhermore, A has come up to the line of scrimmage. If it is an approved ball (going under the assumption that that umpire "tests" the footballs pregame), why would it even matter if this wasn't the ball they wanted?

Did you mean to say (going under the assumption that the Referee "approves" the footballs pregame)? The umpire has jurisdiction over player equipment, not footballs.

[Jim D]

Good point, PSU. In addition to all the other crap going on, the officials were remiss in 1) letting A change balls 2) letting the players handle the change of balls rather than the officials. That makes me suspect that the crew had been told by the coach about this "trick" play and knew what was happening. Otherewise, you'd think they would have stopped the clock to either deny the change to to handle it themselves.

[KSRef]

In Kansas this is USC. Rick Bowden, (KSHSAA) has ruled that this type of deception (and this specific play) have no place in HS football.