Trick Play from Memphis-Louisville Game

[ajmc]

Is it reasonable to suggest we are just football officials, not crafty defense lawyers arguing a case before the Supreme Court. Any coach who does not clearly understand the "Where's the "T" play", and anything remotely similar, is fatally toxic, is in the wrong business.

That is an absolute, "don't go there" situation and any coach who tries to squeeze out the latest variation of that type nonsense because of some minute differentiation, is knowingly risking playing with fire and has earned any USC flag he is presented with.

The best way to end any silly experimentation and quest for a variation that sneaks by, is to ensure the application of an USC penalty as consistently as possible. There is no reason, no excuse, no logic or argument for the results of such a farce to be allowed to stand.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by ajmc

The best way to end any silly experimentation and quest for a variation that sneaks by, is to ensure the application of an USC penalty as consistently as possible. There is no reason, no excuse, no logic or argument for the results of such a farce to be allowed to stand.

Agreed. There is no reason that a play like this should be allowed by rule.

[Robert Goodman]

As I think about the Fed rule, it makes me wonder whether the lines around it are too fuzzy. What about the unusual but not too rare tactic of snapping the ball on the signal of "ready" or "set", where that word usually precedes the snap count? The word is used in the hope that the defense will think the snap is not imminent.

Robert

[Reffing Rev.]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

As I think about the Fed rule, it makes me wonder whether the lines around it are too fuzzy. What about the unusual but not too rare tactic of snapping the ball on the signal of "ready" or "set", where that word usually precedes the snap count? The word is used in the hope that the defense will think the snap is not imminent.

Robert

Last season, in a similar thread i said something along the lines of a silent snap count from under center fits the qualification of a snap not being imminent. Many people told me that was okay because it has been a part of football. It is legal deception. Apparently the only difference between legal deception and illegal deception is how old the deception is.

Now, I am not adovacting this type of play, and I would flag it every Friday night. I agree on the snap not imminent concept, I just hear it more like the defense arguing, "we weren't ready yet, can we have a do over" Where will the line be drawn. My common sense and your's are different.

What can the QB do prior to a direct snap to another back?
Parralel motion?
Silent (legal) motion towards coach?

Here is a serious question...
QB under center steps back to "call out an audible to wide receiver" ball is snapped to HB? I've got a hard time flagging that one.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

Last season, in a similar thread i said something along the lines of a silent snap count from under center fits the qualification of a snap not being imminent. Many people told me that was okay because it has been a part of football. It is legal deception. Apparently the only difference between legal deception and illegal deception is how old the deception is.

The rule says "actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is problem and a snap isn’t imminent"

On a silent snap count the offense stands there and says nothing and the ball is snapped. They didn't do any actions or verbiage of any kind; so there can't be a foul for actions or verbiage designed to make the defense think the snap is not imminent.

[waltjp]

If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck it's probably a duck.

[jjrye22]

Reffing Rev/Rob
How can you interpret snapping on Set or without a count to be decieving the defense into thinking the snap is not immenent.
With the offense in position and set the defense is waiting and expecting the ball to be put into play.

With the topic descussed however, an offensive player is doing actions not typical of a football play respectively actions that are typical of a request to stop play in football. This can be interpreted as the snap no longer being immenent.