WR - false start vs. illegal motion vs. illegal shift

[stegenref]

I had a game last night where a wide receiver (on the line) started moving before the snap and actually crossed the line of scrimmage before the ball was snapped. I blew my whistle, threw my flag, and signalled the white hat that I had a false start. We went ahead and enforced it, but at halftime we talked about it some more. He told me I called it correctly, but he said if the receiver had not crossed the LOS, it would've been a live ball foul for illegal motion / shift and that case I should throw the flag but not kill the play by blowing my whistle. The Umpire told me that only interior linemen can false start.

So what is the difference between a false start, illegal motion, and illegal shift for wideouts and / or those in the backfield?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by stegenref

I had a game last night where a wide receiver (on the line) started moving before the snap and actually crossed the line of scrimmage before the ball was snapped. I blew my whistle, threw my flag, and signalled the white hat that I had a false start. We went ahead and enforced it, but at halftime we talked about it some more. He told me I called it correctly, but he said if the receiver had not crossed the LOS, it would've been a live ball foul for illegal motion / shift and that case I should throw the flag but not kill the play by blowing my whistle. The Umpire told me that only interior linemen can false start.

So what is the difference between a false start, illegal motion, and illegal shift for wideouts and / or those in the backfield?

Define "started moving". Simulating the beginning of the play is a false start and should be flagged and whistled immediately. Merely moving forward (or starting to lean slowly forward) is just motion, and can still be corrected before the snap, so should NOT be whistled.

Generally, IM is 2 guys or moving forward at the snap. IS is not being set long enough. (Generally).

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by stegenref

I had a game last night where a wide receiver (on the line) started moving before the snap and actually crossed the line of scrimmage before the ball was snapped. I blew my whistle, threw my flag, and signalled the white hat that I had a false start. We went ahead and enforced it, but at halftime we talked about it some more. He told me I called it correctly, but he said if the receiver had not crossed the LOS, it would've been a live ball foul for illegal motion / shift and that case I should throw the flag but not kill the play by blowing my whistle. The Umpire told me that only interior linemen can false start.

So what is the difference between a false start, illegal motion, and illegal shift for wideouts and / or those in the backfield?

Sounds like your white hat needs a lesson false start vs. illegal motion. If the receiver did anything that simulated action at the snap, he has committed a false start. The rule is very clear on that:

Rule 7-1-7a
After the ball is marked ready for play and before the snap begins, no false start shall be made by any A player. It is a false start if a shift or feigned charge simulates action at the snap.

What your white hat is probably confused about is the running back who rocks out of his set position a little early and it could have been considered the beginning of shift if not for the snap. There are differing opinions on whether that should be a false start or illegal motion.

[ppaltice]

If he was in the NZ, no question that you had to shut the play down (NFHS). If he was starting his route before the ball was snapped, I concur: False Start. The umpire is incorrect in thinking only interior linemen can false start (although as an umpire, those are the only players he would call a false start on).

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

What your white hat is probably confused about is the running back who rocks out of his set position a little early and it could have been considered the beginning of shift if not for the snap. There are differing opinions on whether that should be a false start or illegal motion.

I agree that the white hat is confused. As for this sitch, a RB rocking forward could be FS or IM but not both, and it shouldn't be a matter of opinion but of judgment. Perhaps that's what you mean.

If the covering official judges that the rocking simulates motion at the snap, then it's a FS; if not, then it's IM for moving toward the LOS at the snap. It's also possible for him to reset and be legal. Usually it a false start.

As for the OP, the covering official actually has 3 choices: FS will be the most common, I imagine, though IM is also possible. If the receiver moved forward without simulating the snap and the ball was not snapped, encroachment is also possible.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by mbyron

As for this sitch, a RB rocking forward could be FS or IM but not both, and it shouldn't be a matter of opinion but of judgment. Perhaps that's what you mean.

Agreed. But the "judgment" of some officials is that if a RB is moving forward at the snap in this manner, there is no way he was going in motion. He missed or jumped the snap and it should be FS every time. Their argument is don't apply judgment. I'm not sure where I land.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Agreed. But the "judgment" of some officials is that if a RB is moving forward at the snap in this manner, there is no way he was going in motion. He missed or jumped the snap and it should be FS every time. Their argument is don't apply judgment. I'm not sure where I land.

It's rare that I don't shut this down.

[stegenref]

[Define "started moving"]

He started moving in that he leaned forward, then took a step, and crossed the line of scrimmage...he was heading out to either block or run a pattern.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by stegenref

[Define "started moving"]

He started moving in that he leaned forward, then took a step, and crossed the line of scrimmage...he was heading out to either block or run a pattern.

If it was Fed rules you'd kill the play for encroachment. Otherwise unless it qualified as a false start (which it probably didn't), he can get back and reset a second before the snap, to avoid a foul for either encroachment or illegal motion (encroachment being the easier call) as the ball becomes live, which can lead to an enforcement or declination (or cancellation) of penalty.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If it was Fed rules you'd kill the play for encroachment. Otherwise unless it qualified as a false start (which it probably didn't), he can get back and reset a second before the snap, to avoid a foul for either encroachment or illegal motion (encroachment being the easier call) as the ball becomes live, which can lead to an enforcement or declination (or cancellation) of penalty.

He missed the snap count. This is a false start.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by stegenref

The Umpire told me that only interior linemen can false start.

[JRutledge]

Anyone on the offense can false start. Going in motion or moving is a different situation. I think we make this too hard.

Peace

[Mike L]

Here's the way I see the diffs

False Start is simulating the start of the play. A back that suddenly lurches or stumbles forward has false started no matter how much he tries to make it look like he was just going in motion.

Illegal Shift is when more than one player moves/shifts at the same time and they don't all set before the snap. If one sets, and the other remains in motion, you still have an illegal shift.

Illegal Motion is when all have set and 1 player goes into motion but is in motion illegally. Typically this happens when the motion man is moving forward at the snap. This includes a back that starts into motion legally (ie not false starting) which can be done by moving forward first and the snap happens before he turns to move parallel or backward. If the motion man turns up early before the snap, he's false started.

As for your play, you have to make a decision if his action simulated the start or he was just starting into motion. I'd say if you have any doubt which one it is, go with false start and shut the mess down.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Here's the way I see the diffs

False Start is simulating the start of the play. A back that suddenly lurches or stumbles forward has false started no matter how much he tries to make it look like he was just going in motion.

Illegal Shift is when more than one player moves/shifts at the same time and they don't all set before the snap. If one sets, and the other remains in motion, you still have an illegal shift.

Illegal Motion is when all have set and 1 player goes into motion but is in motion illegally. Typically this happens when the motion man is moving forward at the snap. This includes a back that starts into motion legally (ie not false starting) which can be done by moving forward first and the snap happens before he turns to move parallel or backward. If the motion man turns up early before the snap, he's false started.

As for your play, you have to make a decision if his action simulated the start or he was just starting into motion. I'd say if you have any doubt which one it is, go with false start and shut the mess down.

I completely agree. The only thing that might need to be added, if the defense moves at what might be an abrupt action, then consider this a false start on the offense if the movement could go either way.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

He missed the snap count. This is a false start.

Maybe this is the way they rule now -- that you can accidentally simulate the start of play, rather than that simulation be understood to mean a deliberate act. All I know is that years ago, when the wording of the false start rule on this point was the same, wide receivers would sometimes be yards downfield at the snap, and play was allowed to proceed with team B being given the option. (Of course that was under Fed or non-Fed rules that didn't kill the play with the offside.)