No mans land??

[jemiller]

In this case, the player is an ineligible receiver due to his position. He does have an eligible number for a back. So I think that the offensive pass interference would be the proper call vs. illegal touching by a lineman. Jim

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by jemiller

In this case, the player is an ineligible receiver due to his position. He does have an eligible number for a back. So I think that the offensive pass interference would be the proper call vs. illegal touching by a lineman. Jim

Don't tell us what you think. Provide a rule reference.

[Robert Goodman]

Unfortunately a player who's supposed to be in the slot gets no assistance from the hand signal by the wing official. But depending on the level of play, you may want to warn a player who seems to be lining up in that position but is not legally off the LOS. Still, you can never be sure until the ball is snapped whether that player is going to shift.

What if all the players of A come to a stop for a second with that player in no man's land, and then he goes in motion at an angle backward but is only 2 yards behind his LOS when the ball is snapped? It's illegal motion, but did he become an eligible receiver or not?

[Texas Aggie]

Jr. High: "Coach, get number __ on or off the line; he's in no man's land." Repeat once, if necessary, then flag.

Frosh/JV: "Number __, get up or move off; you're in no man's land." Tell the coach as well if he's on your sideline. Flag if repeat.

Varsity: Really depends on the play. I let my wings have the discretion to warn or flag on 5 yard penalties, to their choosing. Usually they warn, but they don't let a team gain an advantage.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by jemiller

In this case, the player is an ineligible receiver due to his position. He does have an eligible number for a back. So I think that the offensive pass interference would be the proper call vs. illegal touching by a lineman. Jim

7.5.10 SITUATION A: During a forward-pass play in which the ball crosses the
neutral zone, A1, an ineligible receiver, is illegally downfield and: (a) B1 illegally contacts him with an elbow; or (b) A1 blocks B1. RULING: In (a), the personal foul by B1 and A1’s foul for being downfield combine to make a double foul and the down will be replayed. The contact by B1 is not defensive pass interference because A1 was an ineligible receiver. Defensive pass interference may occur only against eligible receivers. Had there been no contact and had ineligible A1 touched such a pass, the result would have been illegal touching. In (b), it is amultiple foul for an ineligible illegally downfield and also offensive pass interference.
(7-5-6a; 7-5-13; 10-2-1,3)

[BoBo]

We told the coach a couple of times in the first quarter and i spoke with the players in the huddle real quick. Finally the second quarter we flagged it. And as luck would have it is the play they score on and we now become the bad guys. The coach was upset with his kids and he knew what we called and understood. After that amazingly no more problems the rest of the night.

Fans did not understand as they never seem to do.

Some people think it is probably a ticky tack call but the defense was making adjustments to their star player and were confused as his position was not easily identifiable whether a back or covered up.

I feel we gave the team fair warning and a chance to correct it.

Thanks for all the input.

[kd0254]

This is something, if you get a chance, you might be able to get taken care of in pregame. If when watching warm ups there are variations of formations that are illegal address it with the coach and describe to him the rule (if neccessary) so he either has a back or a person on the line, not both. I have found that 100% of the time coaches are very receptive to this and appreciate this "preventive officiating".

Not a rule reference, but when officiating anything we can address in this manner I think everyone is better off.

[With_Two_Flakes]

Back in the day (25 years ago) when I first started officiating, it was hammered into me - Don't ever call this, no-one ever calls it, it's a ticky-tack call. Stand a few inches to one side or the other to make him legal from your viewpoint and have a word with the kid after the play is over.

Is the general philosophy in the US nowadays to take it more seriously?

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by With_Two_Flakes

Back in the day (25 years ago) when I first started officiating, it was hammered into me - Don't ever call this, no-one ever calls it, it's a ticky-tack call. Stand a few inches to one side or the other to make him legal from your viewpoint and have a word with the kid after the play is over.

Is the general philosophy in the US nowadays to take it more seriously?

I don't know that it's EVER been a "Don't ever call this" situation, although I would agree it's always been a "Don't go hunting for", or "nitpick" type violation. As several mention above, this is the type situation a well placed word of advice or caution, to a coach or player, can accomplish a lot more lomger lasting good than a quick flag.

Even the best advice, or most valuable word of caution doesn't much matter until the person it's directed to decides to pay attention, and when all else fails a flag is a wonderful attention grabber.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by With_Two_Flakes

Back in the day (25 years ago) when I first started officiating, it was hammered into me - Don't ever call this, no-one ever calls it, it's a ticky-tack call. Stand a few inches to one side or the other to make him legal from your viewpoint and have a word with the kid after the play is over.

Is the general philosophy in the US nowadays to take it more seriously?

I've always been taught to make 'em legal if at all possible and talk to afterwards and that we should only flag if it is a repeated problem.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by With_Two_Flakes

Back in the day (25 years ago) when I first started officiating, it was hammered into me - Don't ever call this, no-one ever calls it, it's a ticky-tack call. Stand a few inches to one side or the other to make him legal from your viewpoint and have a word with the kid after the play is over.

Is the general philosophy in the US nowadays to take it more seriously?

A few inches off is a "hey, don't do that". But if you see the defense confused, you'd better flag it.