Trick play, middle school. Your take...

[SamG]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The issue isn't so much the NBC, CBS, and ABCs screwing it up (although they are supposed to be reporters too), it's ESPN screwing it up. ESPN is supposed to have a bunch of football journalists on staff. A journalist who is doing his job right would know enough about football to at the very least think "something's not right about this" and then call one of the 10 or so football referees his developed a relationship with to do a little research. A real journalist would already know the rule cold and wouldn't need the research.

It's just another sorry statement on the poor quality of sports journalism. All they require of them is the ability to look at a screen and go "Wow! Look at that!"

Edit: This of course doesn't excuse the referee crew for kicking it.

I disagree that a sports journalist is expected to know all the rules, even in a sport as popular as football. Even if a commentator saw the clip and thought "something's not right", the fact no one on the field (who should be up to date on ALL rules) threw a flag would probably be enough for him to think "it must be legal".

Let's even use someone who played/coached football, and presumably knows the rules better than your "average" sports journalist. They see the play and know it was illegal when/where they played, but they don't know what rule set is being used or even if a rule might have changed since they played. They see no yellow flags following the play so "it must be legal".

Believe me, I get that commentators are clueless and often give our wrong information (particularly when you're talking about details about an issue). But without a) yellow flags on the field or b) a coach or someone protesting the illegality of the play, I don't see anything to "raise flags" (pun intended) in anyone's mind.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by SamG

I disagree that a sports journalist is expected to know all the rules, even in a sport as popular as football. Even if a commentator saw the clip and thought "something's not right", the fact no one on the field (who should be up to date on ALL rules) threw a flag would probably be enough for him to think "it must be legal".

Let's even use someone who played/coached football, and presumably knows the rules better than your "average" sports journalist. They see the play and know it was illegal when/where they played, but they don't know what rule set is being used or even if a rule might have changed since they played. They see no yellow flags following the play so "it must be legal".

Believe me, I get that commentators are clueless and often give our wrong information (particularly when you're talking about details about an issue). But without a) yellow flags on the field or b) a coach or someone protesting the illegality of the play, I don't see anything to "raise flags" (pun intended) in anyone's mind.

This kind of lack of expectation is why they get away with it. Journalists are lazy because we don't demand any better from them. If your livelihood depends on writing stories about a game, the least you should do is learn the rules of the game. After all, it's really not a hard thing to do.

But for some reason, we just accept that they're lazy.

[bisonlj]

Don't forget announcers and writers do not hesitate to say officials got a play wrong in other instances where they don't throw flags. They rarely assume that just because a flag isn't thrown it must be legal.

I would never expect a journalist to know the rule on a goofy play like this. There should be some kind of trigger in their head though to check with someone who does know. Unfortunately he could have called his buddy who was the R in the game and still gotten the wrong information.

[SamG]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Don't forget announcers and writers do not hesitate to say officials got a play wrong in other instances where they don't throw flags. They rarely assume that just because a flag isn't thrown it must be legal.

I would never expect a journalist to know the rule on a goofy play like this.

I'm sorry, I should have specified. You are correct about announcers calling out officials when there's no flag, but I think it's safe to say that's for more "well known" (I use that term loosely) rules.

There should be some kind of trigger in their head though to check with someone who does know. Unfortunately he could have called his buddy who was the R in the game and still gotten the wrong information.

I think this is one of those where even if someone thought "it looked wrong", the "crowd's" reaction convinced him HE was wrong. Does that make sense?

[JasonTX]

Under Fed rules, what position is the player receiving the snap in? Lineman, back, or neither? By NCAA rules: One player may be between his scrimmage line and the backs if in a position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s legs. When in such position, that player may receive the snap himself or it may go directly to any player legally a back [S19].

The problem with this play for NCAA is that the ball did not go between the snappers legs.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

Under Fed rules, what position is the player receiving the snap in? Lineman, back, or neither? By NCAA rules: One player may be between his scrimmage line and the backs if in a position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s legs. When in such position, that player may receive the snap himself or it may go directly to any player legally a back [S19].

The problem with this play for NCAA is that the ball did not go between the snappers legs.

The rule in NFHS is identical. I suppose rules lawyers could argue the point of whether the QB actually has to receive the snap there or can just start there and then move his hands in order to receive some other sort of snap such as up by the snapper's shoulder area since the rule is not specific enough for this ridiculous situation.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

Under Fed rules, what position is the player receiving the snap in? Lineman, back, or neither? By NCAA rules: One player may be between his scrimmage line and the backs if in a position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s legs. When in such position, that player may receive the snap himself or it may go directly to any player legally a back [S19].

The problem with this play for NCAA is that the ball did not go between the snappers legs.

Who said the ball has to go between the snapper's legs, just because there's a player there taking advantage of the positioning rule? It says he may receive the snap himself, not that he has to take it from between the legs.

[TXMike]

I think what he means is that when the QB is up in the line like he was here he needs to be in position to receive a hand to hand snap between the snapper's legs. If he is not, he will either be a lineman or a mugwomp. In this case he appeared to be just to the left of the snapper and up so close that by definition he was a lineman.

He knows all snaps do not have to be between the legs as we routinely see it done differently on swinging gate plays

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Who said the ball has to go between the snapper's legs, just because there's a player there taking advantage of the positioning rule? It says he may receive the snap himself, not that he has to take it from between the legs.

I realize the player in position to receive the hand to hand snap doesn't have to actually receive the snap himself. What I was getting at was that a lineman cannot receive a snap. By rule, this QB meets all the requirements for being a lineman.

[Texas Aggie]

So, I'd like TA to explain exactly how you have a quick and continuous motion and the ball leaving the hand in that motion unless it fairly immediately leaves the hand.

And I'd like you to show how what I said was incorrect. The NFHS rules doesn't say "fairly immediately," and the NCAA rules doesn't use either term.

There are legal snaps where the ball does not leave the hand until the arm is well underway with its motion in a front to back (or at an angle) way. I would NOT call that immediate.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

And I'd like you to show how what I said was incorrect. The NFHS rules doesn't say "fairly immediately," and the NCAA rules doesn't use either term.

There are legal snaps where the ball does not leave the hand until the arm is well underway with its motion in a front to back (or at an angle) way. I would NOT call that immediate.

Apparently, according to a post on another board, a certain Dotson Lewis disagrees with you. Mr Lewis is supposedly someone of officiating renown in your home state. Maybe you should argue it with him.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Apparently, according to a post on another board, a certain Dotson Lewis disagrees with you. Mr Lewis is supposedly someone of officiating renown in your home state. Maybe you should argue it with him.

For those that don't know, Mr. Lewis is also the training cooridator for the chapter in which those officials are from who allowed this play to take place without a flag. I am sure they know the proper rules by now. Way before my time, but Dotson was one of the ones who signed the Declaration of Independence. Well, maybe not that long ago, but he has been around Texas football for well over 50 years and he is still officiating on a high school crew. He is one of the ones who created our state association.