Still haven't found a rule citation, I see.

It's kinetics???

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Sure.

Same signal for helping runner and interlocked blocking, different penalty.

If you look on the signal chart, signal 44 states both of those infractions. Signal 19 says false start or illegal formation.

http://i38.tinypic.com/iyzoqx.jpg

2-8.

You know, the physics of movement states that if the snap by A and B player move at the same speed, B would have to start his movement and therefore encroch prior to the snap if he would touch the ball prior to team A's back. Reaction time and accelration by both A & B also needs to be considered.

F = Ma

You missed my point.

You say that false start and snap infraction are the same thing because they have the same signal and same penalty. They're not.

Signal 44 is for both helping the runner and interlocking blocking, only they're not the same thing (despite having the same signal) and they carry different penalties.

You're wrong to say that a false start and a snap infraction are the same thing because they have the same signal and therefore the same penalty. Snap infraction is not false start.

dead ball signal 19

I did not miss the point I showed you that signal 44 could be for either of those fouls just like signal 19 can be for false start or illegal formation.

Just like signal 27 can be for USC or noncontact foul.
Those signals that mean more than one thing are labeled as such on the signals pages.

A snap infraction is always a dead ball and an 5 yard penalty on A for false start.
The snap infraction caused B it encroach, thus it was false start I guess.

If B causes the snap infraction, I say it is USC under 9-5-1d the act of slapping the ball begins prior to the snap and hinders the ACTIONS of A


d. Using disconcerting acts or words prior to the snap in an attempt to
interfere with A’s signals or movements.

I don't understand why you'd base your argument A and B moving at the same speed. That's rarely, if ever, the case. I'll concede that if A and B are moving at the rate of acceleration and reach the same top end speed there is no way for B to contact the ball without having previously encroached.

However, if B's reaction time is less than the time gap generated by the difference in acceleration and the resulting velocity between A and B (when B is accelerating faster to a higher velocity) it is absolutely possible for B to touch the ball before it touches a back.

and that makes it an illegal snap ie snap infraction! Who caused it? B Why, Disconcerting act that is uncalled for and USC!

You are correct that a snap enfraction is always a dead ball foul and 5 yard penalty for A but the foul is "snap enfraction" not "false start". These are two different penalties. I agree if that d-lineman hits the ball before the snapper moves it, then you could have an USC. But if he gets it while the ball is moving (so unlikely), you credit the defense for being lightening quick. I think everyone else on this board has showed you they disagree with your interpretation. A phrase I've learned is "don't be a pioneer". That is exactly what you are doing here. Good luck if you ever see it this way and call it but I don't think you'll have much support.

Possible, but not probable, and I am not going to give the benefit of the doubt to B for trying to slap the snap.

RULE 2 SECTION 8 ENCROACHMENT
Encroachment occurs when a player is illegally in the neutral zone during the time interval starting when the ball is marked ready for play and until the ball is snapped or free kicked. For the purposes of enforcing encroachment Restrictions, an entering substitute is not considered to be a player until he is on his team’s side of the neutral zone.

Team A is set. The snapper snaps the ball. After the ball begins to move the nose guard, B60, slaps the ball out of the snapper's hand. Where was the encroachment?

In other words, you're going to make up your own rule. :rolleyes: