False Start?

[Suudy]

In discussions with other officials over a beer last night, we considered the following:

A has 7 on the line of scrimmage. All interior linemen have their hands on the ground. The tackles, guards, and center are all numbered 50-79.

Prior to the snap, the end A1, moves into the backfield, uncovering the tackle, A2. A2 then lifts his hand and adjusts. Then A1 moves back onto the line. All are legally set before the snap.

Is this a false start by A2? A2 is not eligible by number, but is on the end of the line. Can A2 lift his hand a shift while on the end of the line, regardless of his eligibility?

[Jim D]

7-1-7 restricts players on the line between the center and the player on the end of the line. It has nothing to do with pass eligibility. In the play you mentioned, A2 is on the end of the line so he is not restricted on adjusting his stance.

[MJT]

Originally Posted by Jim D

7-1-7 restricts players on the line between the center and the player on the end of the line. It has nothing to do with pass eligibility. In the play you mentioned, A2 is on the end of the line so he is not restricted on adjusting his stance.

I agree it is legal, but he had better do it pretty darn slow or we will have a FS.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by MJT

I agree it is legal, but he had better do it pretty darn slow or we will have a FS.

That was where the conversation really went. Frequently we'll see a shift where the tight end will shift to the other end of the line, the flanker will move up, and the split end will move back. Or the tight-end will move into a slot position, then the flanker moves up. Only ends and backs are moving, so nothing strange.

The question really hovered around the timing. How soon after the movement by the split end to uncover the tackle is required before the tackle can move? Does the split end have to establish himself as a back for any amount of time before the tackle is free to move?

[Niner]

Originally Posted by MJT

I agree it is legal, but he had better do it pretty darn slow or we will have a FS.

If this is your standard, then it must be the standard for all shifts because the tackle's movement is legal.

[Jim D]

Suudy, In my opinion, once the end moves off the line (and even before he sets at a new position) A2 is now positioned on the end of the line and can reset. For example, if A3 is the end and A2 is the tackle and A3 gets up and wanders into the backfield, A2 is now and end and can reset. A3 could then wander back to the line and get set again as the end. The restriciton on A2 is turned off and turned on again depending on A3's position. Of course they all have to be set a second before the snap.

[DJ_NV]

Note that in NCAA, if the tackle--or any "end" that has a number 50-79 (excluding the snapper) and puts their hand on the ground, it's a false start if they move it. So in this case the shift was legal right up to the point that A2 lifts his hands (assuming he's numbered 50-79).

NCAA 7-1-3-a-4-c

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by Suudy

A2 is not eligible by number, but is on the end of the line.

How is A2 not eligible by number? By putting A2 that indicated he is on Team A and his number is 2. Perhaps you meant to put something like A50 or some other 50-79 number?

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

How is A2 not eligible by number? By putting A2 that indicated he is on Team A and his number is 2. Perhaps you meant to put something like A50 or some other 50-79 number?

Fair enough, I can do A50, etc.

What I did say though was:

Originally Posted by Suudy

The tackles, guards, and center are all numbered 50-79.

Thus, ineligible by number.

[MJT]

Originally Posted by Niner

If this is your standard, then it must be the standard for all shifts because the tackle's movement is legal.

It is a heck of a lot different when that player is in a 3 pt stance, which you do not see often unless in a situation like that. If he does not come up slow, he will be simulating the start of the play for sure and I bet most will say is should be a FS.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by Suudy

Fair enough, I can do A50, etc.

What I did say though was:

Thus, ineligible by number.

The confusion was with putting 50-79 and then saying A2 was ineligible by number, which is not possible by any rule code since A2 is an eligible number. I do see now that you were using A2 to refer to one of those 50-79 guys.