Forward handing to a lineman
 

I didn't get any replies to where I had posted this so I thought I would try again.

A has the left guard turn around after the snap so that he is facing his own goalline and is now 1 yard or slightly more behind the LOS. The QB hands the guard the ball in a forward hand-off. Then the majority of the offense runs toward the right while the guard runs toward the left and ends up scoring. Did this meet all of the requirements for forward handing to a lineman who is not an end?

7-3-2
No player may hand the ball forward except during a scrimmage down before a change of possession, provided both players are in or behind the neutral zone and it is to:
a. A lineman who has clearly faced his goal line by moving both feet in a half-turn and is at least 1 yard behind his line when he receives the ball.
b. To a back or a teammate who, at the snap, was on an end of his line and was not the snapper nor adjacent to the snapper.

So in 7-3-2b the rule makes a reference to "end of his line." It also uses the term "behind his line" in 7-3-2a. Is it referencing the same thing in these two rules? Some may say that "his line" is the offensive side of the neutral zone, which is how I have interpreted it. However with the wording of 7-3-2b, "end of his line," I think they might be stating that "his line" is the group of linemen, of which he is one, in their presnap formation. Since the end of the line-of-scrimmage or neutral zone is at the sideline it is not logical that this player, standing at the sideline, is the only player allowed to be handed to since he is already an end and doesn't have the turn-around restriction. So if these two rules are in fact referencing the same "line" then the guard would have to turn around and also take one big step backward to meet these requirements to legally accept a forward handoff.

Behind his line means behind the line of scrimmage which is the position of the box or the foremost point of the ball.

Unless the lineman is a little guy, he is probably 1 yard behind that point by the time he does his 180 to face his own goal-line.
Based on your play description, it looks fine to me.

I agree that this sounds legal. For an offensive lineman to turn and face his own goal line and NOT be at least a yard behind his line would require a pirouette. If he moves at all, it's probably legal.

I agree with both of your posts and would rule on them that way. However in my last paragraph I get into the wording they are using in the rules about "line." In one part of the rule they talk about the "end of his line" and "behind his line." I suspect that these "lines" were meant to be the same thing when origianally written and thus the lineman must do more than just turn around. Even the rule says that in that both feet must have moved which indicates to me more than just a pirouette.

When they specify the term "behind his line," if they meant to specify that his line was to be his side of the neutral zone then I think they would have said that.

This is just some more funny wording which may have not been meant to indicate what it means to us today. I have never seen this play and hope to never see it.

Maybe this will help.
The references to "his line" or "the line" are actually two different things.

In (a), his line is the line of scrimmage. So you can hand the ball forward to the snapper, either guard or either tackle if we talk standard balanced formation if he does the 180 and is 1 yard behind the LOS.

In part (b), as long as the player was the END on the line of scrimmage you could hand it forward to him without those additional restrictions of a 180 and being 1 yard behind.
The restrictions in (b) are you can't hand it forward if you are on the end of the line and are the snapper or as it says, adjacent to the snapper who is on the end of the line.

So, if you had an unbalanced formation such as this:

• b.0 LE rT LT LG S rG rE

you could hand it forward to the rE without any of (a) stuff.
But if you had a formation such as

• b.1 LE rT LT rG LG S rE or
• b.2 LE rE rT LT rG LG S

you cannot had it forward to the rE in b.1 or the S in b.2 without complying with the stuff in (a)

Sounds like the play up here in Idaho 1.5 weeks ago. Coach of opponent complained to the state. Fed, State, and district all upheld the call as legal, as did the crew on the field. I saw the play online, would have to agree with them.

Could you post a link to the video?

Try this: http://legacy.idahostatesman.com/sports/highschool/