Batting the ball BEFORE the snap

[a4caster]

We had this last night and had a complete brain freeze on penalty enforcement. To set it up, team b scored but did not make the conversion, so team a is on top with 30 sec. left. Team a gets ball back and will take a knee. Nose Guard comes up when everyone goes down and bats the ball from the snapper before he can snap it. My first reaction was encroachment (breaking the plane of the neutral zone.) But somewhere in the vastness of my mind, I recall something brought up in the past few years that this is a potential travesty of the game, and as such should be treated as an unsportsmanlike. Since the NG was being a jerk all night, that's the route we took, and the coaches didn't disagree. But the true penalty is in doubt.
Your thoughts...

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by a4caster

My first reaction was encroachment (breaking the plane of the neutral zone.) But somewhere in the vastness of my mind, I recall something brought up in the past few years that this is a potential travesty of the game, and as such should be treated as an unsportsmanlike.

Repeated encroachment offenses in an effort to continually half the distance to the goal may be construed as creating a travesty. The penalty could include forfeiture of the game. A single offense is not a travesty.

Since the NG was being a jerk all night, that's the route we took, and the coaches didn't disagree. But the true penalty is in doubt.
Your thoughts...

Being a jerk, in and of itself, is not a foul. It's possible, but unlikely that a nose guard will be fast enough to slap the ball from the snapper's hand without encroaching. If you see encroachment, call it. Otherwise, don't make stuff up.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by a4caster

We had this last night and had a complete brain freeze on penalty enforcement. To set it up, team b scored but did not make the conversion, so team a is on top with 30 sec. left. Team a gets ball back and will take a knee. Nose Guard comes up when everyone goes down and bats the ball from the snapper before he can snap it. My first reaction was encroachment (breaking the plane of the neutral zone.) But somewhere in the vastness of my mind, I recall something brought up in the past few years that this is a potential travesty of the game, and as such should be treated as an unsportsmanlike. Since the NG was being a jerk all night, that's the route we took, and the coaches didn't disagree. But the true penalty is in doubt.
Your thoughts...

I think if you're going to ding someone for UC, it looks better if you've warned the player first. This is not an absolute, however. This nose guard that was being a jerk all night, did you warn him at all during the game about his actions?


CANADIAN RULING:

Before the RFP whistle has sounded: OC for delay = 10 yards.
After the RFP whistle has sounded: Offside = 5 yards, with a possible OC for delay as well.

[bigjohn]

SECTION 9 UNFAIR ACTS
ART. 1 . . . A player or nonplayer or person(s) not subject to the rules shall not
hinder play by an unfair act which has no specific rule coverage.

I guess you can say there is rules coverage. Illegal batting, encroachment but I say 9-9-1 gives you rule coverage to call USC on the NG. even eject if you think blatant.

ART. 2 . . . No player shall bat a loose ball other than a pass or a fumble in
flight, or a low scrimmage kick in flight which he is attempting to block in or
behind the expanded neutral zone.

The snap is a loose ball play!

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

SECTION 9 UNFAIR ACTS
ART. 1 . . . A player or nonplayer or person(s) not subject to the rules shall not
hinder play by an unfair act which has no specific rule coverage.

I guess you can say there is rules coverage. Illegal batting, encroachment but I say 9-9-1 gives you rule coverage to call USC on the NG. even eject if you think blatant.

NF: 9-9-1 is intended to cover the really, REALLY unusual circumstances that nobody writing rules was able to anticipate. Most likely, no individual official will ever encounter a situation calling for evoking this rule, will never meet another official who ever found it necessary to evoke this rule, or will ever even hear about this rule being enforced.

This "Unfair Act" rule (with the possible exception of new Article 4) has about the same ratio to "Hurdling" being enforced, as Hurdling does to "Flase Start". It's there to cover really, REALLY flagrant exceptions, and nothing else.

[Mike L]

I believe the accepted interp for a defender slapping the ball from the snapper's hand is you must have either a dead ball encroachment by B or a snap infraction by A.
It is practically impossible for B to react quickly enough to slap a valid sharp and direct snap.

[NorCalRef12]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

SECTION 9 UNFAIR ACTS
I guess you can say there is rules coverage. Illegal batting, encroachment but I say 9-9-1 gives you rule coverage to call USC on the NG. even eject if you think blatant.

ART. 2 . . . No player shall bat a loose ball other than a pass or a fumble in
flight, or a low scrimmage kick in flight which he is attempting to block in or
behind the expanded neutral zone.

The snap is a loose ball play!

Definitely won't be illegal batting. The snap is a loose ball play, a backwards pass to be more specific.

This will either be encroachment (Most likely), or a snap infraction if the center hesitated on the snap for some reason. If the NG is quick enough to bat the ball away while the center snaps the ball, I'd tell the center to snap the ball faster.

[kdf5]

If he was trying to anticipate the snap then call encroachment. If it was clear that he was being a jerk then ring him up for an UC. This sounds like nothing more than a garden variety, run of the mill UC. Don't invoke the God Rule and this wasn't a travesty of the game.

[bigjohn]

The snap is a loose ball play but is it a pass in FLIGHT?


ART. 2 . . . No player shall bat a loose ball other than a pass or a fumble in
flight,

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

The snap is a loose ball play but is it a pass in FLIGHT?


ART. 2 . . . No player shall bat a loose ball other than a pass or a fumble in
flight,

A snap is a backward pass if it isn't a handing. A snap to a QB in shotgun is a backward pass, a snap to a QB directly under the center is handing (2-19-1).

[NorCalRef12]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

The snap is a loose ball play but is it a pass in FLIGHT?


ART. 2 . . . No player shall bat a loose ball other than a pass or a fumble in
flight,

Should we start calling illegal batting every time a B player tries to bat a ball out of the runners arm during a tackle?

[bigjohn]

that is my point, it is not illegal batting unless the ball is in flight, so that can't be called and if it is being done just to stall it could fall under.


or just 3-6-2f

f. Any other conduct which unduly prolongs the game.

[Mike L]

How about just letting it fall under the rule that applies? It's either encroachment or an illegal snap. Plain and simple.
And if jerky boy decides he has to keep on doing it, well it's probably time he enjoys a stay on the bench.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

that is my point, it is not illegal batting unless the ball is in flight, so that can't be called and if it is being done just to stall it could fall under.


or just 3-6-2f

f. Any other conduct which unduly prolongs the game.

Why would you try and fit some "similar" circumstance to replace what is a direct remedy to the situation described by NF: 7-1-5 &/or 6 (Encroachment)?

[NorCalRef12]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

that is my point, it is not illegal batting unless the ball is in flight, so that can't be called and if it is being done just to stall it could fall under.


or just 3-6-2f

f. Any other conduct which unduly prolongs the game.

Sorry John, I thought you were saying it could be illegal batting.

And for the record while this could "technically" be done within the rules, I think officials should ere on the side of calling this encroachment more often than not.