Center Eligible?

[Simbio]

If the center was the last man on the end of the line, wearing an eligible number, can he be eligible for a pass?

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by Simbio

If the center was the last man on the end of the line, wearing an eligible number, can he be eligible for a pass?

If he's on the end of the line and wearing an eligible number, he is an eligible receiver whether he's the snapper or not. If he's on the end of the line, how could he be the center of anything? Forget the "coach speak" of the word center.

[dumbref]

If I understand the new numbering exception rules, this would be a foul at the snap if the snapper is under the exception rule. The snapper must be between the ends. Some variations of the old swinging gate may become illegal. I’ll be interested to see how shifts might affect eligibility in this set.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by dumbref

If I understand the new numbering exception rules, this would be a foul at the snap if the snapper is under the exception rule. The snapper must be between the ends. Some variations of the old swinging gate may become illegal. I’ll be interested to see how shifts might affect eligibility in this set.

Where do you come up with the "snapper must be between the ends?"

[dumbref]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Where do you come up with the "snapper must be between the ends?"

I know it’s a dangerous source – Referee Magazine.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Simbio

If the centre was the last man on the end of the line, wearing an eligible number, can he be eligible for a pass?

CANADIAN RULING:

Affirmative.

Originally Posted by dumbref

If I understand the new numbering exception rules, this would be a foul at the snap if the snapper is under the exception rule. The snapper must be between the ends. Some variations of the old swinging gate may become illegal. I’ll be interested to see how shifts might affect eligibility in this set.

From what I'm gathering from my "research" on the topic of the numbering exception, the only thing they did with the rule was clarify what a scrimmage kick is. I don't think they've completely outlawed the swinging gate offenses by rewording the scrimmage kick definition. If they did (and perhaps inadvertently), then there's going to be more coaches upset at the 11-man game than those using the A-11 offense. Coaches in the 8-man game would care less because their numbering exception would still be in place (I would hope so, otherwise there'll be screaming and gnashing of the teeth!).

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by dumbref

I know it’s a dangerous source – Referee Magazine.

or a coach...or a father...or a fan...

Originally Posted by Forksref

or a coach...or a father...or a fan...

or the Saturday morning armchair "referee" reading the ucking flocal newspaper and reading too much into everything about the game he saw the night before.

[dumbref]

Originally Posted by Forksref

or a coach...or a father...or a fan...

This is how the Referee article reads:

“On first, second or third down, when the kicking team sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation with a holder, only one lineman may wear a number other than 50-79 inclusive. That player must snap the ball and must be positioned between the ends. …”

This seemed very specific and creditable as opposed to some of their interpretations. I’ll let you decide

Originally Posted by dumbref

This is how the Referee article reads:

“On first, second or third down, when the kicking team sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation with a holder, only one lineman may wear a number other than 50-79 inclusive. That player must snap the ball and must be positioned between the ends. …”

This seemed very specific and creditable as opposed to some of their interpretations. I’ll let you decide

Hmmm...I'll have to log onto the Fed's website and see if they have the specific language published there. The only thing that is available to the general public is that the language was clarified, and I was relying on memory the fact they clarified the definition of a scrimmage kick. Maybe the more specific language is password protected to keep us on edge till this summer when we all get our books.

[dumbref]

OK, during the afternoon sit down (perfect place for Referee Mag) I re-read the article. Here is the piece I missed.

“On fourth down or trys, the kicking team may use the numbering exception when it sets or shifts into either type of scrimmage-kick formation”

Since the winging gate is used mostly on trys, there shouldn’t be a major difference. It would only apply on downs 1, 2 & 3. My bad!

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Hmmm...I'll have to log onto the Fed's website and see if they have the specific language published there. The only thing that is available to the general public is that the language was clarified, and I was relying on memory the fact they clarified the definition of a scrimmage kick. Maybe the more specific language is password protected to keep us on edge till this summer when we all get our books.

The actual rule semantics are not yet published on the NFHS site.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by dumbref

This is how the Referee article reads:

“On first, second or third down, when the kicking team sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation with a holder, only one lineman may wear a number other than 50-79 inclusive. That player must snap the ball and must be positioned between the ends. …”

Wow! So if you're in a scrimmage kick formation, you'll need 6 line players wearing 50-79? (Or 1 fewer than the number of linemen if you have an 8-man line, etc.?) And neither of the ends will be allowed to wear eligible numbers? Or does that apply only if they become "the kicking team" during the subsequent down?

I suspect Referee goofed.

Robert in the Bronx

[KWH]

Robert-
I think perhaps you need to read it again.
Remember the numbering requirment on a typical scrimmage play requires a minimum of at least 5 lineman to be numbered 50-79.
The new 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down exception allows the snapper to wear #35 however there is still a requirment for a minimum of at least 4 lineman be number 50-79 if the exception is utilized.

Unless I am reading something incorrectly the REFEREE article is correct...