A-11 Offense in Illinois
 

It's that time of year, scrimmages start in two weeks, and the rules study and review has gotten hot and heavy.

The IHSA (Illinois) has posted an A-11 Offense interpretation on their website; but their interpretation now raises a question:

Rule 2-14-2 Scrimmage Kick Formation requires at least one player 7-yds or more behind the neutral zone. It says nothing about that player being the receiver of the snap.
The IHSA posted interpretation says "The receiver of the snap is at least 7 yards off the line of scrimmage. Otherwise you have an illegal formation since they did not meet the requirement of a scrimmage kick formation which allows for the numbering exception."

Any IHSA officials out there have any take on this?

This illegal formation is supposed to be the call of the referee, and I'm the white hat.
Thanks.
I haven't posed the question to the IHSA directly, but hope to this weekend.

What is there to explain? The IHSA basically is supporting the current rule. You cannot have numbers of any kind on the field and not be illegal unless they are in a scrimmage kick formation. That requires someone 7 yards or more behind the snapper. It sounds to me like you are splitting hairs with the language and not understanding what they are trying to say. The A-11 is legal if they follow the NF Rules. This might change in coming years as all this attention is going to force some ruling one way or another on this offense.

Peace

The difference you've noted is likely just sloppy translation. The inclusion of the sentence, "Otherwise you have an illegal formation since they did not meet the requirement of a scrimmage kick formation which allows for the numbering exception." doesn't suggest the intention was to tighten NF: 2.14.2 by requiring the person, "7-yds or more behind the neutral zone" to actually receive the snap.

Your pointing out the confusing language to your State Association will give them the opportunity to ammend it.

I do not know Fed rules but based on what was posted I'd say it looks like Illinois is trying to clamp down as best they can until NFHS comes to their senses on this. Illinois is adding a requirement that not only must there be someone 7 yards or more behind the LOS but that he must actually receive the snap. I assume that means if there is someone back there but there is an upback less than 7 yards from LOS and he receives the snap, then you can flag them for an illegal formation (assuming they are using "excepted" numbering).

It is not an added requirement. You cannot run this offense with a QB under center. You must be in a scrimmage kick formation to allow not having 5 players with 50-79 on the line. And to have a scrimmage kick formation, you must have someone receiving the ball 7 yards behind the LOS. That is not an added requirement that is the rule.

Peace

Who said you can't have a QB under C in a scrimmage kick formation?

RG, in a scrimmage kick formation, The Rule Book for one,
"2-14-2 A scrimmage-kick formation is a formation with at least one player 7 yards or more behind the neutral zone and in position to receive the long snap. No player may be in position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper's legs."

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.

The NF rule does not say anything like that. By your state office posting those words the way did, they just took away a snap to an up-back as now the formation is probably illegal.

The fake kick play has been around a lot longer than A11 offense.

Your office needed to say one of two things, either the formation is legal as per NFHS current rules or to say "we" have deemed the formation to in violation of something and therefore illegal. Period!

I believe, TXMike, you are assessing the dilemma correctly. The verbiage used by the State Association does add an extra requirement, by the language they used.

The NFHS rule simply states a scrimmage kick formation requires "At least one player 7 yards or more behind the neutral zone and in position to receive the long snap." It does not require that the ball be snapped to that player.

The language attributed to the IHSA is, ""The receiver of the snap is at least 7 yards off the line of scrimmage", which represents a completely different requirement, in that a deep (7 yards back) player must actually receive the snap.

The $64,000 question, which golfdesigner indicated he will ask, is whether the IHSA release actually says what they meant it to say, and do they realize they are differentiating from, and expanding, the NF rule. I hope they provide a timely answer.

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

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.

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

Sorry, I wasn't up to date. Did they add the last bit to keep teams from taking advantage of the roughing the snapper provision?

No. That statement has been in the rules for years. It simply helps define a scrimmage kick formation. If there's a player in place to take a direct snap, then it's not a SKF and the numbering exception is not allowed.

2-14-2
A scrimmage-kick formation is a formation with at least one player 7 yards or more behind the neutral zone and in position to receive the long snap. No player may be in position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper s legs.

If one cannot see there is a difference between
"The receiver of the snap must be 7 yds back"
and
"There must be a player 7 yds back in position to receive the snap"
then there is not much hope in trying to correctly figure out the rule.

The A-11 is going to be run by at least one Chicago suburban team this year.:mad:

If the IHSA language added the word "potential" as in "The potential receiver of the snap is at least 7 yards off the line of scrimmage," that would bring both statements into alignment, wouldn't it?

I would parse that as "If you have a guy at least 7 yards back and he's in position to receive that snap, whether or not he actually receives it, it's a scrimmage kick formation, so on you get."

But we have the state's rules interpreter at our local meeting tonight, so I'll ask him.

Okay, I've got a question from a purely layman's perspective. What sorts of coaches are trying this offense? It strikes me as a gimmick offense, so I have to wonder if successful coaches plan on ignoring this latest fad.

Just a guess, but either somebody who's trying to take a moribund program and put some life into it, or somebody whose offensive lineman average about 110 pounds. :)

I would think it would take a lot to get an established, blood n guts coach to abandon what he's been doing for years to try this. It would almost have to be someone young and innovative.

Hell, it only takes one - the guy who's coaching one of the two teams in the game you happen to be officiating that night.