Slapping the Snap

[Sonofanump]

Originally Posted by Brett

it is absolutely possible for B to touch the ball before it touches a back.

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

[bigjohn]

Team B slaps at the snap

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by waltjp

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

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

2-8.

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?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

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

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

[Sonofanump]

Originally Posted by waltjp

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

Why on earth would you error on the side of 1% chance of this happening?
A snap is not going to be so slow that a defender could not encroach and hit the ball during the snap. If it is then by rule it is illegal. Rule 2.39.2 says quick and continuous. I guess we have different philosophies on how the game should be played and what we should and should not be calling. I do not look for that one in a lifetime occurrence on the field, I look for the spirit of the rules and the integrity of good sportsmanship. Slapping the snap is BS and needs to be called.

[bigjohn]

So go ahead and call it USC, SON!

[MrUmpire]

I have seen this attempted three times in my career. I was on the side each time. Each time, the defensive lineman's hand entered the neutral zone prior to the snap beginning. Each time encroachment was called.

A defender would not have to be just a little quicker, he'd have to be a hell of lot quicker to make this work. Remember, he has to reach across the neutral zone first and catch up to an object already being moved away from him quickly.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

I have seen this attempted three times in my career. I was on the side each time. Each time, the defensive lineman's hand entered the neutral zone prior to the snap beginning. Each time encroachment was called.

A defender would not have to be just a little quicker, he'd have to be a hell of lot quicker to make this work. Remember, he has to reach across the neutral zone first and catch up to an object already being moved away from him quickly.

But he doesn't have to catch up much. His hand could be a millimeter from the neutral zone to start with. Or, if he picked up some tell by the snapper, his hand could already be moving, timed to enter the NZ just at the snap, while the ball is still stationary.

Am I correct that NCAA's requirements for completing the snap are different from Fed's? ISTR the snap in NCAA as only having to completely transit the plane of the snapper's waist. If that's so, then that's their saving grace that allows their "ball is snapped" in this case to mean the snap was completed, while Fed's means the snap has begun.

I really think Fed didn't contemplate this situation. If they had, they might've adopted NCAA's solution, or might've altered the requirement of a legal snap to relieve A of any foul when contact by B occurred in this manner.

Just a thought: once the requirement of completing a snap was adopted, Fed could just as well have eliminated the requirement that the snap be quick & continuous, because if it's not, B would produce the illegal-snap-by-A situation as described herein. But maybe not. The snapper might have ways of picking up the ball and quickly turning to protect it, like setting a maul except that players of A couldn't bind on. Or the snapper could pick the ball up while charging ahead and delaying letting go of it. Meanwhile the lines would "dissolve" and it would become unclear whether the first player to touch the snapped ball was in the backfield at the time.

Robert

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But he doesn't have to catch up much. His hand could be a millimeter from the neutral zone to start with. Or, if he picked up some tell by the snapper, his hand could already be moving, timed to enter the NZ just at the snap, while the ball is still stationary.

When you have to reach that far to try to defend your argument, you've lost.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

Why on earth would you error on the side of 1% chance of this happening?
A snap is not going to be so slow that a defender could not encroach and hit the ball during the snap. If it is then by rule it is illegal. Rule 2.39.2 says quick and continuous. I guess we have different philosophies on how the game should be played and what we should and should not be calling. I do not look for that one in a lifetime occurrence on the field, I look for the spirit of the rules and the integrity of good sportsmanship. Slapping the snap is BS and needs to be called.

My philosophy is - call a foul when you see it. Don't assume.

If you'd rather call fouls according to your gut then by all means, go ahead.