Verbal deception on A

[cougar729]

Weird play, weird penalty

NF: Team A 1st and 10 at their own 35 yardline. A1 takes the snap and hands off to A2 who is running towards his own sideline. A3 approaches A2 on a reverse type play, instead of A2 handing off to A3, he keeps it and continues to run in his original direction. A3, now pretending to have the ball is running towards B's sideline, but does so while yelling "Reverse, Reverse" As he does this several B players let up on their pursuit of A2 and begin running down A3. Play ends up as an 11 yard gain, ball at the 46.

Ruling: Referee has an unsportsmanlike penalty on A3 for Verbal deception. We enforce as Dead ball foul from suceeding spot, end of run, back up 15 and have 1st and 10 from the 31.

Question:
TO what part of the rule-book can I reference? my 1st thought was 9-5-1d, which states: No player shall act in an unsportsmanlike manner...by using disconcerting acts or words prior to the snap in an attempt to interfere with A's signals or movements. (Obviously this does not say anything about A doing this after the snap)
My only other reference would be 9-9-1: A player or nonplayer or person not subject to the rules shall not hinder play by an act which has no specific rule coverage.

What do you all think about this?

[Jim D]

You can't reference a rule because there is none. The play was legal and your WH needs to start reading the rule book.

[Sonofanump]

Jim,

How is this different than the "wrong ball" play. The quarterback takes the snap from the center and walks toward his sideline saying "wrong ball" then takes off once he is past the interior linemen.

[Jim D]

For the wrong ball play or the missing tee play, the verbal deception takes place before the snap and tries to fool the defense by indicating that the snap is not immanent and that is deception is prohibited by rule. Once the ball is snapped, there is no ban on deceptive moves, actions or words.

The ban on the words before the snap is based solely on pretending the snap is not immanent. If a QB was somehow yelling to his receives before the snap that he was going to pass the ball and then ran after the snap, there would also be no foul.

[cmathews]

Are we going to start calling quarterbacks that use Dummy audibles for penalties next??? We used the "reverse" play in high school as well....I see nothing wrong with it. Another difference with the "wrong ball" play is that taking the ball to the sideline to get another ball makes the defense relax period, they think no play is happening, in the "reverse" play the defensive end should stay home anyway and if they are that intent on listening to someone else giving them their reads, then they probably aren't the most skilled players anyway...

[Bob M.]

REPLY: No foul. R should have kept the flag in his knickers instead of injecting himself into the game to that extent.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

Jim,

How is this different than the "wrong ball" play. The quarterback takes the snap from the center and walks toward his sideline saying "wrong ball" then takes off once he is past the interior linemen.

This play is different from the "wrong ball" play in that it is only verbal and it is only done by one player. In the "wrong ball" play all 11 players are involved and there is action by the QB to deceive. If we flag this play in question, then we are opening a can of worms here. I wouldn't touch this one.

[claude]

I had this one tonight. All 11 A players break huddle and come set in a legal formation. The coach is screaming for one of the backs to get off of the field saying "there is one too many out there". One of the backs are about 5 yards from his sideline when the ball is snapped and goes out for a pass which is incomplete. It kind of caught me offgaurd. Should I have blown this dead at the snap? I gave a 15 UC penalty

[Theisey]

Claude: this play is just like the "where's the tee" play.
By all means, bang the coach with a 15 yard (UC) penalty.

I know some will disagree, but I would kill the play just as the case book says for the "where's the tee" play.

When are these coaches gonna stop trying to pull this crap.

[Snake~eyes]

Next up.... USC for hard count - after all he's using "verbal deception"

[Middleman]

Originally Posted by Theisey

Claude: this play is just like the "where's the tee" play.
By all means, bang the coach with a 15 yard (UC) penalty.

I know some will disagree, but I would kill the play just as the case book says for the "where's the tee" play.

When are these coaches gonna stop trying to pull this crap.

Rather than Unsportsmanlike Conduct, I'd call this Illegal Participation, 9-6-4d. We see extra/replaced players trying to hustle off the field before the snap all the time. In this case the defense is illegally duped into believing the player is leaving the field, but it does not necessarily cause the defense to believe that the snap is not imminent (which is the essential component of the "Where's the tee?" play). Make it a live ball foul and call back the TD.

Of course, if you are intent on hanging Unsportsmanlike Conduct number 1 on the coach, you can. Then he's half way out the gate. Surely you can find an illegally equipped player (e.g., knee pads don't cover the knee) for number 2.

[Sonofanump]

Jim,

Thanks.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by Middleman

Rather than Unsportsmanlike Conduct, I'd call this Illegal Participation, 9-6-4d. We see extra/replaced players trying to hustle off the field before the snap all the time. In this case the defense is illegally duped into believing the player is leaving the field, but it does not necessarily cause the defense to believe that the snap is not imminent (which is the essential component of the "Where's the tee?" play). Make it a live ball foul and call back the TD.

Of course, if you are intent on hanging Unsportsmanlike Conduct number 1 on the coach, you can. Then he's half way out the gate. Surely you can find an illegally equipped player (e.g., knee pads don't cover the knee) for number 2.

REPLY: Except that the Federation Case Book specifically addresses the "Where's the tee" or "We've got the wrong ball" type of play on page 78 in 9.9.3 Situation B and specifically rules it as USC prior to the snap. Therefore the play will not start in theory. The 'comment' explains what the Fed believes the 'dupe' really is--and it's not substitution.

[ToGreySt]

I had this play in a JV game this week. 4th and 5, A lines up and one of the players on A yells "PUNT, PUNT!" and then they snap the ball and run the ball up the middle for a first down, the WH flags them for an "unfair act" because it made the defence send someone deep to field the punt.

seems very similar to the OP situation, any comments?

Joe

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by ToGreySt

I had this play in a JV game this week. 4th and 5, A lines up and one of the players on A yells "PUNT, PUNT!" and then they snap the ball and run the ball up the middle for a first down, the WH flags them for an "unfair act" because it made the defence send someone deep to field the punt.

seems very similar to the OP situation, any comments?

Joe

I guess the offense seen something in the defense and had an audible, which is perfectly legal to do.