Man in Motion on the Line

[Ed Hickland]

The youth leagues and junior high schools often run plays that take a player initially positioned on the line and have him go in motion a) the player is split and his motion is toward the snapper, or b) the player's motion is slightly behind the LOS of scrimmage.

My contention is the player in either case is illegally in motion. But I find myself a minority of one for penalizing this motion.

The rules plainly states in order to go in motion from a position on the line the player must be 5 yards behind the line.

Does the offense gain any advantage when this illegal motion is used?

[BktBallRef]

I believe you rule interpretation to be correct. He must either be in motion 5 yards behind the LOS or reset as a back.

In lower level games, I usually inform the coach of the rule and they do, at least, make the player go in motion behind the linemen. I think this is one of those often ignored rules and honestly, don't see the need for it.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
I believe you rule interpretation to be correct. He must either be in motion 5 yards behind the LOS or reset as a back.

In lower level games, I usually inform the coach of the rule and they do, at least, make the player go in motion behind the linemen. I think this is one of those often ignored rules and honestly, don't see the need for it.

There was an excellent reason for the rule. Previous to last year's rule change a player could enter the free blocking zone with momentum and block below the waist.

Having that player go back 5 yards placed him outside the FBZ; therefore, he was unable to legally block below the waist.

[BktBallRef]

Good point, Ed.

[Mike Simonds]

This discussion reminds me of some questions I had last year regarding shifts, motion, and blocking below the waist.

Now, I know the tight end can go into a 3 point stance, rise up, and shift to another position along the line. He must reset for 1 second prior to the snap. If he does not, would this be a shift or a motion violation?

Also, when you read the updated rules regarding blocking below the waist, you will note that they took out the language requiring offensive linemen to be stationary at the snap.

Using our example above, lets say the tight end is within the free blocking zone at all times prior to and during the down. If he is guilty of a shift or a motion violation at the snap, is he still entitled to block below the waist if he meets all the requirements? The rule seems to allow the BBW.

Seems to me if the NF was concerned about safety they would rewrite the rule to make this into a multiple foul by A and B would have the choice of selecting the 15 yard penalty for BBW versus the 5 yard penalty for illegal shift/motion.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally posted by Mike Simonds
This discussion reminds me of some questions I had last year regarding shifts, motion, and blocking below the waist.

Now, I know the tight end can go into a 3 point stance, rise up, and shift to another position along the line. He must reset for 1 second prior to the snap. If he does not, would this be a shift or a motion violation?

It would be an illegal shift since he was not in motion at the snap.

Also, when you read the updated rules regarding blocking below the waist, you will note that they took out the language requiring offensive linemen to be stationary at the snap.

Using our example above, lets say the tight end is within the free blocking zone at all times prior to and during the down. If he is guilty of a shift or a motion violation at the snap, is he still entitled to block below the waist if he meets all the requirements? The rule seems to allow the BBW.

If he is set in the 6x8 free blocking zone on the line at the snap he can block below the waist on a defensive player. Personally, I would call multiple fouls -- illegal shift and illegal block.

Seems to me if the NF was concerned about safety they would rewrite the rule to make this into a multiple foul by A and B would have the choice of selecting the 15 yard penalty for BBW versus the 5 yard penalty for illegal shift/motion.

It would be a multiple foul as you described. Of course, there is not much of a choice, 5 versus 15. THat is one of those times when you don't give the captain a choice.

[BktBallRef]

Mike, how he can be on the LOS, in the FBZ, and not be stationary?

[Mike Simonds]

What I meant is that the tight end can be illegally shifting or illegally in motion at the snap and block somebody below the waist. I wanted to find out if this was a multiple foul and if B had a choice between the 5 yard or the 15 yard penalty.

This is why I believe the NF should add back the requirement that offensive linemen should be stationary at the snap if they are to BBTW within the FBZ (assuming all other requirements are met).

The rules seem vague in this situation.

[BktBallRef]

The way it was explained to us was that a player can't be on the LOS unless he is stationary. That's why it was taken out.

[Mike Simonds]

Yes, I agree with you. However, lets say the tight end was late going down into his stance and/or he was in motion illegally along the line of scrimmage at the snap. If he was within the FBZ at the snap and then blocked an opponent below the waist, the way the rule is currently written would penalize him for illegal shift/motion but not for the BBTW.

I just want help to find the justification (with rule references) to charge A with a multiple foul and give B the choice of the 5 or 15 yard penalty. That is why I feel the NF should put back the language requiring A linemen to be stationary at the snap (in the BBTW rules).