Snap Infraction or not

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by stegenref

JV game the other night...the center was hiking the ball relatively slowly (compared to most centers I've seen). The opposing coach asked me, "Isn't that a snap infraction?" I told him no, as long as he kept the ball moving, I wasn't going to call it. I told him if the center stopped mid-snap and tried to put the ball back down, then that would be a snap infraction. Sound right?

Yes. The purpose of the "quick" in "quick and continuous" was to avoid a situation in which the snapper held onto the ball long enough to create a whole class of play with the ball kept "in scrimmage", which would necessitate more rules and rulings. We've already had arguments here about whether to flag, and whom and for what, in either Fed or NCAA if an opponent managed to get a hand on the ball after the snapper started moving it but before it left the snapper's hand(s).

In rugby when the ball stays in scrummage, the offside lines, similar to the restraining lines, remain in effect and can even move, and there are different rules regarding playing the ball depending whether it's in or out. The requirement of a snap that gets the ball out of scrimmage quickly and smoothly allows North American football to dissolve its restraining lines at that instant and not have to have different rules to keep play interesting during that interval.

Was the snapper in that game just trying to deliver a slow, soft snap, or did it look like he was deliberately retaining the ball longer than necessary? That's what I think you have to rule on for the "quick" requirement. The "continuous" part is pretty self explanatory, although at one time I thought it might prohibit certain around-the-bend movement of the hands and ball and require the motion to be in a straight line; it doesn't, it just prohibits hesitations, recocking, putting the ball back down as you suggest, etc.