Illegal motion or shift?

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by asdf

It's 54-0. Final kneel down play of the game.

A62 flinches prior to the snap. Nobody moves (after all it's the last kneel down of the game... this baby is over....)
are you are going to flag A62 for a false start?

If you are, the you are true to your word....leaving people wondering "who in tarnation taught tis guy to officiate?"
If you are not, then you are not true to your word and actually agree with many on here who say "not every time".

Again, what people think of me has never been a motivation for what I do. If the OL false starts and the game is 100-0, I'm throwing my flag.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by BroKen62

Again, what people think of me has never been a motivation for what I do. If the OL false starts and the game is 100-0, I'm throwing my flag.

Solid

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by asdf

Solid

I liked Okie Dokie better.

[BroKen62]

Reading through the rule book a minute ago and came across this gem in the 2009 edition of NFHS:

The major problem in dealing with false starts is the inconsistency in administration.
Whether or not a false start has occurred, or not, is not predicated upon whether the
defender encroaches or not, or by the down and/or distance.

[bigjohn]

How about 7-1-7b

Hut-Hut-HutHutt!



b. Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach.


I have heard many officials say that snap count falls under this but I say, snap count is not an ACT. It is verbiage, now if the team runs a play that is just snap counts and no snap, that ACT was clearly designed to draw B into the NZ.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

How about 7-1-7b

Hut-Hut-HutHutt!

b. Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach.

I have heard many officials say that snap count falls under this but I say, snap count is not an ACT. It is verbiage, now if the team runs a play that is just snap counts and no snap, that ACT was clearly designed to draw B into the NZ.

Of course the snap count is an act. The rule should prohibit acts whose ONLY purpose is to cause B to encroach. Since a snap count is part of the sequence leading to a snap, and since teams are legally permitted to vary their snap count, this kind of deception is not a violation of the rules.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Of course the snap count is an act. The rule should prohibit acts whose ONLY purpose is to cause B to encroach. Since a snap count is part of the sequence leading to a snap, and since teams are legally permitted to vary their snap count, this kind of deception is not a violation of the rules.

What would be some examples of acts whose ONLY purpose is to cause B to encroach? Not trying to be cute, but I can't think of any that would not fall under the "sequence leading to a snap."

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

How about 7-1-7b

Hut-Hut-HutHutt!



b. Any act is clearly intended to cause B to encroach.


I have heard many officials say that snap count falls under this

You've heard this from very poor officials. This is legal in ALL levels.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by broken62

reading through the rule book a minute ago and came across this gem in the 2009 edition of nfhs:

the major problem in dealing with false starts is the inconsistency in administration.
Whether or not a false start has occurred, or not, is not predicated upon whether the
defender encroaches or not, or by the down and/or distance.

+1

[bigjohn]

No that isn't what I meant. Many officials on these boards say you can't call 7-1-7b by the book because then you would have to penalize a wild snap count or hard count.

My point is you can still penalize an act that is solely designed to draw B off such as the snap down punt and the possum play(where hard count is used but ball is never snapped)

By rule those are plays(acts) devised just to draw B into the NZ to draw an encroachment penalty!

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

the possum play(where hard count is used but ball is never snapped)

By rule those are plays(acts) devised just to draw B into the NZ to draw an encroachment penalty!

The what play? Describe please?

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by asdf

Okee Dokee !!!

Naw, you're right. If it's that bad, I'm keeping my flag in my pocket. But still, Mike has a point - There are some fouls you just can't pick and choose. You have to admit come game time, if ole 78 flinches you're not gonna let that go - that's a fla thag every time (except on the last play of a blowout )
Same way with the dead ball push - if it's not excessive or viscious, you're not gonna throw a flag on that ever - maybe a word - "Quit that", but no flag. If it gets escessive or viscious, you're not worried about how many times you've warned him, you've got a flag every time. Right or Wrong?