Boise State

[Warrenkicker]

One thing I saw about the try for Oklahoma where they had the illegal shift is that the "tight end" who went in motion and then caught the ball appeared to be lined up on the LOS and went in motion along the LOS. When I first saw it I thought he was just shifting and I was convinced of that because he started before the wing had stopped and then they snapped the ball before the "tight end" stopped. I would like to see that formation again to see because I thought that the replay confirmed what I thought I saw. I could be wrong but maybe one of you out there has a copy of the game and can look at that again.

[BktBallRef]

When I saw what a terrific finish it was going to be, I backed up the DVR to the point of BSU's final punt and recorded until the end.

The illegal shift was the correct call. As soon as the ball was snapped I said "illegal shift." After the catch, the announcers said, "There's a flag on the play," I knew what it was.

The TE that caught the ball went in motion/shifted before the other TE completed his shift. I honestly don't know if there was suppoed to be motion or if they were both supposed to shift and reset but he did not reset for 1 second before the ball was snapped. A call went each way, the crew got it right and they made both teams play a third try until they got it right.

[Warrenkicker]

Well Tony, since you have the game on DVR please check to see if the tight end in motion was on the LOS or was a back. I knew as soon as the ball was snapped that there was a foul but it surprised me to see them snap the ball with the tight end still moving.

[ABoselli]

I, too, saw the TE in motion along the LOS. The penalty is the same and both rules (motion,shift) rules were violated so take your pick.

I thought the DPI in the EZ on the try was classic arm bar.

[ChickenOfNC]

I also thought on Boise's touchdown play in overtime, that when the QB went in motion, he definitely turned upfield before the snap.

Myself and another official were both watching the highlights on Youtube this morning, and we both sort of caught that at the same time.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by ChickenOfNC

I also thought on Boise's touchdown play in overtime, that when the QB went in motion, he definitely turned upfield before the snap.

Myself and another official were both watching the highlights on Youtube this morning, and we both sort of caught that at the same time.

What bearing did his act have on the subsequent action which resulted in the score? Did it give his team an advantage?

[ChickenOfNC]

Originally Posted by TXMike

What bearing did his act have on the subsequent action which resulted in the score? Did it give his team an advantage?

So we're supposed to start judging advantage/disadvantage on illegal shift/motion/formation?

When did we start that? Didn't get that memo.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by ChickenOfNC

So we're supposed to start judging advantage/disadvantage on illegal shift/motion/formation?

When did we start that? Didn't get that memo.

The advanced official knows when a flag is warranted and when it is not. In that specific situation it was not. As has been pretty accurately described by a fellow poster on another site:

"You don't need to pre-determine. It only takes an extra second or two. While that is an eternity for uneducated fans and sportswriters it shouldn't be for us. Simply hold your flag and then determine whether it affected it or not. Which I'm sure is what the wing official did here. The play went away so he held it. If it would have come his way at all I'm sure you would have seen a flag."

[ChickenOfNC]

Originally Posted by TXMike

The advanced official knows when a flag is warranted and when it is not. In that specific situation it was not. As has been pretty accurately described by a fellow poster on another site:

"You don't need to pre-determine. It only takes an extra second or two. While that is an eternity for uneducated fans and sportswriters it shouldn't be for us. Simply hold your flag and then determine whether it affected it or not. Which I'm sure is what the wing official did here. The play went away so he held it. If it would have come his way at all I'm sure you would have seen a flag."

So when let's say a fullback misses the snap count and practically falls on his face trying to catch himself, then the snap occurs, we let that go because he really put himself at a disadvantage?

Or we have a wideout who's clearly lined up off the line, when he's supposed to be on, and we have only six on the LOS, but the offense runs a sweep to the opposite side, we don't flag for illegal formation?

I just think that's a slippery slope when we're talking about letting formation/motion/shift fouls go.

Obviously, I agree that there are other fouls that require great judgment on our part, i.e. holds away from the play, etc. But I don't think judment should come into play on pre-snap and at-the-snap type fouls.

[TXMike]

The FB's foul is presnap so everything is shut down and penalty administred. No brainer. For fouls at the snap, i.e. illegal formation, if you can tell relatively right away the "foul" will have no bearing then you should pass on it.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by ChickenOfNC

So when let's say a fullback misses the snap count and practically falls on his face trying to catch himself, then the snap occurs, we let that go because he really put himself at a disadvantage?

Or we have a wideout who's clearly lined up off the line, when he's supposed to be on, and we have only six on the LOS, but the offense runs a sweep to the opposite side, we don't flag for illegal formation?

I just think that's a slippery slope when we're talking about letting formation/motion/shift fouls go.

Obviously, I agree that there are other fouls that require great judgment on our part, i.e. holds away from the play, etc. But I don't think judment should come into play on pre-snap and at-the-snap type fouls.

When you have illegal formations or illegal shifts then those must be called because those are a disadvantage to the defense. The defense is reading the formation to determine who they need to cover. The motion call was not a quick jump or an obvious head start. The defense wasn't at a real disadvantage because they read the play and covered him as they were supposed to. If the pass would have came that direction then I'd throw my flag for his "slight" head start. If I recall correctly he was going almost diagonally.

[ChickenOfNC]

Originally Posted by TXMike

The FB's foul is presnap so everything is shut down and penalty administred. No brainer. For fouls at the snap, i.e. illegal formation, if you can tell relatively right away the "foul" will have no bearing then you should pass on it.

For some, it's a dead ball, and for others, it's a live ball. Don't want to go off on a tangent, but alot of officials treat this as illegal motion and not false start. I personally agree that it's a false start.

Either way, I respect all of your opinions, but still respectfully disagree. I think illegal shifts/motion/formations all need to be called.

[bisonlj]

I noticed that when I saw the play live but forgot about it with all the other excitement that followed. When I saw a replay later I watched him and agree it was diagonal. I assumed the official let it go because from his angle it wasn't quite as obvious. I've never heard that you make a judgement call for formation/motion/shift based on where the play goes or if it had an impact on the play. The only time I do that is if the movement is so slight that the movement itself did not have an impact on the play or if it's a 30-point game late in the 4th quarter and a 40-degree rain.

I'm not saying the wing official missed the call but I disagree with TXMike that you make a judgement call based on the rest of the play for motion/shift/formation penalties.

[TXMike]

I never said anything about "the rest of the play". In some rare cases, like this one, the covering official was able to process everything at the snap and IMMEDIATELY afterwards and apparently realized his flag would not be appropriate so he held it. The ability to do that may be one of the factors the differentiates between officials who are otherwise at the top of their game. You may choose to blindly throw your flag without thinking why you are doing what you are doing. I would submit that makes you a robot and not what we would hope for from officials at the top.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

When you have illegal formations or illegal shifts then those must be called because those are a disadvantage to the defense. The defense is reading the formation to determine who they need to cover. The motion call was not a quick jump or an obvious head start. The defense wasn't at a real disadvantage because they read the play and covered him as they were supposed to. If the pass would have came that direction then I'd throw my flag for his "slight" head start. If I recall correctly he was going almost diagonally.

I don't see how you can possibly make this comparison.

On the 2 point conversion by OU, the TE was called for an illegal shift because he did not reset fora full 1 second. You say that the defense is reading the formation to know who they need to cover. Are you telling me they didn't know he was an eligible receiver?

But then you turn around and say that OU was not placed at a disadvantage by the BSU QB moving toward the LOS at the snap. I saw it when the play was ran and was surprised there was no flag. How is it BSU was placed at a disadvantage but OU wasn't?

May I say that the same official had both calls?

Sorry but you can't have it both ways.