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
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 09, 2008, 06:10pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXMike
Where in the rule does it say that the person in position to receive the snap actually receives it? Seems to me the interp is adding that requirement.
They are not saying you have to receive the snap. They are reminding everyone that you have to have someone 7 yards back to receive the snap. Usually that is the QB or kicker, but we of course know under NF Rules, that does not have to be what is usually the QB or Kicker. But if you are going to have numbering exception (which is a big part of the A-11), you need someone in position to receive the snap. But it is clear that running a fake punt to the upback is very legal in NF rules in a scrimmage kick formation. And I have talked to people that helped talk about this interpretation, and they were not changing anything that was not already in the rules.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 09, 2008, 07:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
They are not saying you have to receive the snap. They are reminding everyone that you have to have someone 7 yards back to receive the snap. Usually that is the QB or kicker, but we of course know under NF Rules, that does not have to be what is usually the QB or Kicker. But if you are going to have numbering exception (which is a big part of the A-11), you need someone in position to receive the snap. But it is clear that running a fake punt to the upback is very legal in NF rules in a scrimmage kick formation. And I have talked to people that helped talk about this interpretation, and they were not changing anything that was not already in the rules.

Peace
If it says, as was posted, "The receiver of the snap has to be 7 yards" then how can you say the upback who is the "receiver of the snap" and was only 4 yards from the LOS fits in the interp as posted? If it is, as appears to be, sloppy writing by someone in Illinois, then so be it, but if I were an Illinois official, until I heard otherwise, I would interpret it as written.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 09, 2008, 07:12pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXMike
If it says, as was posted, "The receiver of the snap has to be 7 yards" then how can you say the upback who is the "receiver of the snap" and was only 4 yards from the LOS fits in the interp as posted? If it is, as appears to be, sloppy writing by someone in Illinois, then so be it, but if I were an Illinois official, until I heard otherwise, I would interpret it as written.
Now you said you were not familiar with NF Rules and being from Texas I would not expect you to be. The point is that if we use what you say the ruling is saying, then you cannot ever have another player receive the snap. That is not true under NF Rules when using the scrimmage kick formation (which is required to have the A-11 offense). I personally think that people are making a bigger deal over a minor comment rather than looking at what the point is of the interpretation. And I am an Illinois official, and I never even thought that there had to be someone 7 yards to actually receive the snap or else. But someone has to be in position to receive the snap to have a scrimmage kick formation (by rule), or you cannot have a legal scrimmage kick formation and have players not numbered 50-79 numbered players in the formation. It really is that simple.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 14, 2008, 01:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 31
Send a message via ICQ to stevegarbs Send a message via AIM to stevegarbs Send a message via Yahoo to stevegarbs
The A-11 is going to be run by at least one Chicago suburban team this year.
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A-11 Offense ?? TXMike Football 203 Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:43pm
When the offense figured it out... JBrew32 Baseball 5 Wed Jun 20, 2007 10:19pm
offense penalized d1ref2b Basketball 75 Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:04pm
Did the offense give up their at bat? tskill Baseball 8 Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:31pm
Offense Confererence DrC. Baseball 2 Fri Sep 29, 2000 02:47pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1