Wrong Ball Play
 

Remember the video of the play where the center yells, “Coach this is the wrong ball”. He then hands the ball to the QB with a legal snap. The QB then walks to the sideline under the guise of getting the right ball. Once he gets outside all the Team B players he turns up field and runs for a touchdown?

If I remember correctgly, it was decided that the play was not legal because of 9-5-1b which stated that, “Any action or verbiage used to deceive the defense into thinking that the ball is not about to become live”, is an unsportsmanlike foul.

I can’t find that language in this year’s rule book. Would that make the play legal?

It's in the Case Book, not the Rule Book. Look under Unfair Acts.

I saw this in a game last year in the playoffs of a pee-wee league. I was working LJ on the side of the team running the play. We, as officials, had no prior knowledge of the play before it was run. I recognized it as it was going on. The play ran (for a touchdown) and then all hell broke loose. I threw a flag, for USC, but in the huddle the R overruled me. He allowed the TD to count. That team went on to lose the game, and deservingly so I feel. I'm still mad that I let the play go when I 'read' it. Had I blown it dead the R could have still overruled me, but the team wouldn't be rewarded with a touchdown.

I hope you sent him a copy of the case play. :mad:

Would any of you opt for killing it (with an officials' time out to "change the ball" (and scold the coach)) rather than flagging it for USC? Would it make a difference if the kids were 10? 14? 18?

That video you refer to is clearly an illegal snap. It must be one quick continuous motion in a backward direction. As soon as the center stood up with the ball it was a snap infraction.

You might be right about it being an illegal snap. We have the requirement that "2-40-2...In a snap, the movement must be a quick and continuous backward motion of the ball during which the ball immediately leaves the hand(s)
of the snapper..."

This original play had a motion that may or may not have been quick. It is hard to say exactly what is quick.

It appeared to be a continuous motion though some may feel it wasn't. I know they tried to make it continuous.

It was a backward motion. Our rule definitions say that if a movement with the ball is not forward then it is backward. This ball movement was not forward so it had to be backward.

Did the ball immediately leave the snapper's hand? At the end of his motion he gave it to a back and didn't hold on to it for a while. I believe it did leave his hand immediately upon reaching the back.

So I feel the only question about this snap is if you call it quick. I have always felt this was a legal snap. Perhaps you don't and that is fine. They checked it all out with the officials that night and it was decided that it was all legal then. Rules were changed/clarified after that night. And though we know the play is now clearly illegal today it is much less clear that it was illegal that night. The rules writers may like to think it was illegal back then but obviously is wasn't clear enough to those enforcing the rules to keep them from running that play.

According to the case book you should have blown it dead right away and then penalized USC. You can't let this play continue.

References? What about "up". The center cannot lift the ball up and then snap it back. In the video he comes up and turns sideways to hand the ball back. "Up" is not forward, but it is certainly not backward either.

Again, if I could be so bold, the next time a coach uses this play, I vote he gets strung up in the town square with a sign that reads, "I AM AN IDIOT".
cheers,
tro

"I got a new play. It's called the Sergeant York."

Well we probably won't agree. He stood up and in one motion took the ball from the ground to the QBs hands. The ball never went forward. "Up" is not a direction that we care about. Backward or forward we do care about. If it isn't moving forward then it is moving backward. Those are the only two directions we have. And I could see your point about "up" if the snap changed directions while in the snapper's hands. I don't see an up then back, I see an up and back movement.

I know. I kicked myself in the *** for weeks for letting it go off. One of the other 3 officials should have blown it dead, too. I am still upset with the white hat for not correcting it though.

It doesn't matter. The foul occurs prior to the snap. So even if you fail to kill it, the play never happened.

Does anyone have a Fed citation for the "wrong ball" play being illegal?

*9.9.1 SITUATION B: From a field goal formation, potential kicker A1 yells, “Where’s the tee?” A2 replies, “I’ll go get it” and goes legally in motion toward his team’s sideline. Ball is snapped to A1 who throws a touchdown pass to A2. RULING: Unsportsmanlike conduct prior to snap. The ball should be declared dead and the foul enforced as a dead-ball foul.

COMMENT: Football has been and always will be a game of deception and trickery involving multiple shifts, unusual formations and creative plays. However, actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is problem and a snap isn’t imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal.

I've heard so many white hats ask the coach in pre-game meeting"

".......players properly equiped? Do you have any special or unusual plays that we should know about?"

When I was a young official, this play was rampant in Louisiana (before K State did it). It was deemed legal back then (1996 I think). Fortunately everyone has decided this is illegal.

They key is you cannot use a nonplayer (be it a coach, substitute or replaced player) to deceive the opponent.

That's a good question to ask for a couple of reasons. The first is if the coach informs you that they want to run an illegal play (ie wrong ball play). In that case, you can be pro-active and notify the coach that type of play is not legal.

The second is if the coach has any legal plays that are unusual such as the swinging gate formation (is that still legal this year?) or plays such as double reverses, etc. While we should always be on our toes for such things, it is good to have a pregame reminder that something like that might be coming.

No, I don't think that's an equivalent statement of the rule.

For one thing, a player of A could indicate a "problem" and that the snap was not imminent without involving a non-player, and it would be just as illegal. It could be "Is this the ball we use?" or "Is my chin strap on right?" and involve no more than a huddle between 2 players.

For another, a non-player on the sideline could falsely shout something like, "Throw it to Zev.", and it would be legal. Maybe even shout a false count of the play or game clock, but I'm less sure about that.

The rule in question addresses a specific sort of deception that has been ruled unfair, and should not be extended by interpret'n to cover other forms of deception, nor narrowed to cover only those involving ostensible communication with non-players.

Robert

no one has to say anything. ACTIONS or VERBIAGE


actions or verbiage designed to confuse



A22 acts as if he has injured a ankle but refuses assistance when asked by the referee if he is ok. during the next play he limps but doesn't participate directly in the play. On the next play, A22 goes in motion with a very severe limp, but at the snap he tears down the field, with a miracle cure and catches a long pass? Any problems? Any foul?

NCAA: 2 choices -- no equipment may be used to confuse the opponent, and no obviously unfair act not specifically covered may be used. We're shutting down the play. Hopefully the coach asks the question pregame and we can stop it, but if it happens and we can go with an illegal snap, we'll do that. Otherwise, 15 yards.

I'll take my chances in allowing the coach to defend his play if he complains to the UIL. This isn't a difficult one. The intent of the rules is that this play is illegal.

Assuming he's in motion as a receiver normally would go in motion and not limping towards his bench like he's trying to get off the field and motioning for a substitute...

Play on. No problem. No foul.

What about a limping receiver simply going in motion confuses the defense into believing there is problem and a snap isn’t imminent?

I read that thread two years ago. I thought you might have some additional thoughts.

It is from the Redding guide. That means nothing, right?

As long as the offense isn't using the player in a pretend substitution, then I'm going with "that's nothing".

Year before last working a game in nw MO all of the first half whenever BJ started his count A's entire sideline would start counting down from 5, I guess so that A would snap the ball and not get the DOG. 4th quarter the opponents break the huddle after what seems like an eternity, and as they come to the line they start counting (BJ has not counted yet), the offense rushes the snap before they are all set. I killed it with a USC on the defense for "false counting" Right or wrong, I stick with that call, clearly the defense was trying to confuse their opponent in a way not allowed by rules.

Some might say that the offense has the responsibility to know the play clock and watch the BJ rather than listen to the defense, but I could say they defense should watch the snap and not listen to the "where's the tee play" too, but i digress.

Same thing, different park:

Blue picks White's pocket at the defensive 3-point line. White bench starts to go "5.... 4.... 3.... 2...." and Blue shots just across half and on a breakaway. I waited until the shot was released, and then: "Whack!"

At my whistle, the clock read 0:05. The Blue player totally had time to take it in for an uncontested layup. :cool:

Rule 9-5-1d covers this situation. This is the rule for USC and the example is "using disconcerting acts or words prior to the snap in an attempt to interfere with A's signals or movements".

This is a play where I think you are going to get a very split answer. There is no absolute coverage of this play in the rule book and Reddigs is only a guide. I see a difference in faking the injury to a point where the defense doesn't think the snap is imminent and just a hobbling player in motion. For me, the former gets a flag and the latter does not.

I've always thought that was just to cover trying to simulate A's snap count or other such signal, or trying to drown out their signals, especially since it doesn't say anything about A's trying to simulate B's shift or assignment signals. I never thought it would cover something like simulating a play clock count from the sideline, though "signals" doesn't say it's limited to on-field signals.

I was also thinking of cases where A's sideline falsely gives a play clock count to make B think the snap is coming sooner than it actually is.

Robert

I'll make it even easier. As the white hat, I'm not going to allow a player whom is visably hurt to play. It's a huge liability for my and my crew and if it's visable enough for B to notice, then I or my other officials had also better notice.

I agree. I see a player hobbling along to the point it appears he's injured to me, I'm calling an injury time out and off he goes. And I pity the coach that comes up to me to complain it was all an act & I ruined his "play".

bison,

The problem is that 9-5-1d applies to acts and words by players. A player is someone in the game. "Players" on the sideline are covered under 9-8 and there is nothing in 9-8 to justify a foul on this.

I'm not calling anything. If the QB is dumb enough to rely on the opposing bench to tell him how much time he has, rather than looking to the BJ, he deserves what he got. How stupid can you get?

Let me change it up. Saw a video of this from a college game.

A lines up in shotgun. A snaps the ball to the QB. All A players stay in there stances and do not move. Quaterback stops and looks relaxed. B players stand up and don't move. A-80 the receiver jets down the field and the QB then throws to him for a TD.

My inclination is that this is illegal. However, the rules don't address it specifically.

Why should the rules protect B from being stupid?

At the point everyone stopped and the QB looked relaxed I'd blow the whistle and kill the play to protect relaxed players from being hit. Saftey first, boys! If A failed to advance, that's their option - the down counts.

By that logic you could whistle a play dead any time there's a pretended runner. After faking receiving a handoff...why...he might be tackled by mistake...and not be ready for it!

The aforementioned play is no more than an extreme example of a bootleg or bootleg pass. Many times a QB will look relaxed after having pretended to hand the ball off. Are you going to blow the play dead because some players of B may have relaxed once they thought he no longer had the ball?

Robert

Cause this isn't about being stupid. This is about it being a football play versus some adminstrative bull crap. Every foodball play is suposed to start the same way via a legal snap (not counting free kicks for you strict interpretationists) That's what the kids are trained for. Now you can argue that this is a legal snap even through it does not pass between the snapper's legs, but this play isn't football, this is a "hah hah Fooled you." Trick plays such as play action, fake punt, swinging gate, and onside kicks are football plays, this isn't. Blow it dead and march em back.

It's "hah hah" only because of the "wrong ball" aspect. Otherwise, you're saying the snap "isn't football" just because it's unusual. Even one of the plays you listed, swinging gate, uses an unusual form of snap.

Has it occurred to you that snapping the ball by turning around with it could have deceptive and tactical advantages? At Coach Huey's we're having a discussion about various sorts of advantages that could be gained by unusual forms of snap. One thought is that the turnaround snap could end with the ball's being taken by a back in fly motion, same as the usual motion of the quarterback but eliminating the middleman. Then, because the snapper would have turned to face backward by a motion of both feet, he's eligible to take the ball back by a forward handoff.

If the rules makers wanted to restrict the snap further, they could do so -- as has been done in Canadian football and some forms of touch football, which require the snap to pass between the legs. The only thing the American football rulesmakers wanted to do was to avoid rugby's situation where the live ball could remain in scrimmage for a significant time.

Robert

There's a lot of things I was going to say to this, but decided it would just be better to ask, under what rule do you intend to penalize them? Or is it just because you don't approve of the play you "need" to shut it down?

Legal Snap or Not. Use Rule 9.9.1 (or 5) Unfair acts

Just about every case book I have laid eyes on including the 09 edition has the passage "*9.9.1 SITUATION B .... COMMENT: Football has been and always been a game of deception and trickery involving multiple shifts, unusual formations, and creative plays. However, actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defenseinto believing there is a problem and a snap isn't imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal." (true this is the "where's the Tee" play but I put them in the same category)

Do yourself a favor and shut this play down as soon as you recognize it. Go deal with the coach (who is going to be even madder if you let the kid run the length of the field for an apparent TD before you blow the whistle) Rule 9.9 allows the Referee to levy an equitable penalty so a USC is not necessary. Perhaps a request to replay the down with a different play called. Delay of Game is another alternative if you feel the coach is taking advantage of a situation. Only bad things can happen if this play gets called. Don't make it worse by actually letting them run it.

There is no hard and fast rule about what is legal deception and what isn't legal. Just about every football play has some measure of deception in it.

While deception within the play is acceptable under the rules (bootlegs, flea flickers, etc.) it also seems like the rules makes don't approve deception on the status of the whole play (where's the tee, wrong ball). This seems to me that type of play so I will not allow it. I have no problem explaining to a coach why I either blew it dead (protect the players) or penalized it for USC.

I don't agree on giving him a do-over, though.