The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 03, 2006, 06:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossman72
What if this was genuinely unintentional?
Then I expect I might have a flag for either illegal shift or illegal motion, since the RB is not motionless at the snap.

I think you'll be able to read this from the reaction of the player attempting to call the timeout. If the snap goes off and he's really caught flatfooted, then I might judge this to be unintentional. If he starts moving immediately, I'm shutting it down and flagging it.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Sun Nov 05, 2006, 11:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 39
We seem to be reading a lot into the intent of the players on plays like this. How do you know the RB did not know they had no timeouts? How do you know the RB did not think the formation was wrong or something else was wrong? As for motion, if the RB is not simulating a start and no other player is moving how is this false start or illegal shift? This very well could be a simple mistake that worked out in Team B's favor.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Sun Nov 05, 2006, 11:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Roamin' Umpire
Then I expect I might have a flag for either illegal shift or illegal motion, since the RB is not motionless at the snap.

I think you'll be able to read this from the reaction of the player attempting to call the timeout. If the snap goes off and he's really caught flatfooted, then I might judge this to be unintentional. If he starts moving immediately, I'm shutting it down and flagging it.

I see. Although i don't think you can have an illegal motion/shift since the motion seemed legal.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Mon Nov 06, 2006, 12:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 183
Canadian Ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Only if the official believes this tactic is being used as a midleading tactic, penalize as 10 yards Objectionable Conduct. In eleven seasons I have never seen it used thisway.
Actually, in Canada I believe this would fall under misleading tactics (1-11-2c) and not OC. If you call OC then you would have to allow the result of the play such as a TD to stand since OC is L10 but no cancelling of the play. So it would be L5DR on 1st or 2nd down.

If 14 seasons never had anyone do this.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Mon Nov 06, 2006, 01:28pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwcfoa43
Actually, in Canada I believe this would fall under misleading tactics (1-11-2c) and not OC. If you call OC then you would have to allow the result of the play such as a TD to stand since OC is L10 but no cancelling of the play. So it would be L5DR on 1st or 2nd down.

In 14 seasons never had anyone do this.
My bad. In 11 seasons, I do not ever recall seeing a misleading tactic, so I guess I forgot how to admin one.

PS: don't forget the lightbulb! I use it as a visible aid to remind people that it's Cdn rules I talk about.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1