The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 11, 2010, 11:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
I think you have to substitute the word "is" for "goes" above. Consider a player who's set just barely in the backfield and goes in motion parallel to the LOS. Suppose that at the snap the closest OL to him has body parts closer to his team's end line than some of his own body parts. He may have been a back when he went in motion, but by getting near that player is no longer a back.
That's not what the rule says. Here's (most of) 7-2-7:

Except for the player “under
the snapper,” as outlined in Article 3, the player in motion shall be at least 5 yards
behind his line of scrimmage at the snap if he started from any position not clearly
behind the line and did not establish himself as a back by stopping for at least
one full second while no part of his body is breaking the vertical plane through
the waistline of his nearest teammate who is on the line of scrimmage.

Nothing in the rules supports the imaginary idea that a back can lose his status as a back by going in motion. And if he's moving toward the NZ at the snap, he's still a back but the motion is illegal.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 11, 2010, 09:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
That's not what the rule says. Here's (most of) 7-2-7:

Except for the player “under
the snapper,” as outlined in Article 3, the player in motion shall be at least 5 yards
behind his line of scrimmage at the snap if he started from any position not clearly
behind the line and did not establish himself as a back by stopping for at least
one full second while no part of his body is breaking the vertical plane through
the waistline of his nearest teammate who is on the line of scrimmage.

Nothing in the rules supports the imaginary idea that a back can lose his status as a back by going in motion. And if he's moving toward the NZ at the snap, he's still a back but the motion is illegal.
Look at the definition of "offensive back" and tell me a player's status can't change depending on which teammate on the line of scrimmage he's closest to. Now tell me why if he's in motion he couldn't be closest to A1 when he started and A2 later.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WR - false start vs. illegal motion vs. illegal shift stegenref Football 25 Sat Oct 02, 2010 09:21pm
illegal shift or illegal motion verticalStripes Football 20 Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:34pm
Mixed Interp: Illegal Motion / Shift ljudge Football 7 Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:12am
Motion, shift or nothing schwinn Football 20 Wed Nov 02, 2005 02:20pm
Illegal Motion or Illegal Shift Simbio Football 11 Fri Oct 31, 2003 08:50pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:28am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1