Fed FBZ accidentally ends

[Robert Goodman]

A1 snaps on the A35. A2 at the A33 seems to unintentionally have the snap glance off him. The ball rolls to the A29, where A2 picks it up and runs to the A40, where he is down. Meanwhile A3, playing a position on A's line within 4 yards of where the ball was previously spotted, takes one step back before cutting B1 at the knees.

Does the recent Fed interpret'n on blocking below the waist help determine whether A3's action is legal? Do you decide on the basis of whether the errant snap looked intentional?

What do you do about cases where a player of A appears to carry out an assignment that involves clipping, blocking in the back, or blocking below the waist on a play where the ball appeared to have first accidentally left the FBZ without that player's being aware of it? Do you rule on the basis of strict liability because it's a safety rule (although it's not clear to me that the rule about blocking in the back is so)? Do you rule on the basis of what the player knew or should have known?

[Welpe]

I am not aware of any interpretation that allows leeway for the ball "unintentionally" leaving the FBZ.

[HLin NC]

Thre isn't one and I've no idea what in the world he's talking about.

[Robert Goodman]

What I'm talking about is that Fed has published an interpret'n based on how to rule when the ball is apparently intended to be snapped to a point outside the FBZ and does leave the FBZ. They're saying that in that case you don't actually have to observe when contact is initiated relative to the time the ball leaves the FBZ, they have another way to rule on it which is the same as some state associations had adopted.

So what I'm looking for is whether you think the same interpret'n would apply or not to a case where the ball leaves the FBZ apparently accidentally but quickly on the snap, or indeed whether this ruling has any bearing on how you'd rule, by clarifying the intention of the rule.

[HLin NC]

Can you cite the case book reference to which you refer?

[Robert Goodman]

I saw it quoted at Huey's last week:

2.17.2 SITUATION E: A1 is in shotgun formation, lined up seven yards behind the line of scrimmage ready to receive the snap. Immediately after the snap to A1, (a) A2 immediately drops and blocks B1 below the waist or (b) A2 rises, and slightly retreats as if to go in traditional pass blocking protection, but then dives and blocks B1 below the waist. Both A2 and B1 were in the zone and on the line of scrimmage at the snap. The contact between A2 and B1 takes place in the freeblocking zone. RULING: It is a legal block in (a) and an illegal block below the waist in (b). It is legal for A2 to block B1 below the waist if the contact is made immediately following the snap. Any later, and the ball is considered to have left the free-blocking zone and the block is illegal.