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 Wed Sep 14, 2011, 09:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,153
I agree if the snapper just spins the ball and rolls it, it is illegal snap, but he lofts it just a bit and rotates his wrist to make the ball land and roll it is legal.
__________________
When my time on earth is gone, and my activities here are passed, I want they bury me upside down, and my critics can kiss my azz!
Bobby Knight
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 10:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
I agree if the snapper just spins the ball and rolls it, it is illegal snap, but he lofts it just a bit and rotates his wrist to make the ball land and roll it is legal.
Seems to me we're picking nits that were not intended by the rulesmakers (not that I was in the room!). What would be the purpose of insisting that the ball leave the ground infinitessimally during a snap? Sounds like we're just creatively trying to force an admittedly undefined section of the rule to fit the answer you want, rather than deriving the answer from the rules themselves.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 11:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,153
The rules say the snap can hit the ground, balls roll when they hit the ground, who is picking nits here?

__________________
When my time on earth is gone, and my activities here are passed, I want they bury me upside down, and my critics can kiss my azz!
Bobby Knight
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 01:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
The rules say the snap can hit the ground, balls roll when they hit the ground, who is picking nits here?

Against my better judgement ... what exactly are you disagreeing with me about, and how am I picking a nit at all... I'm saying let it go. The fact that the OP would be ruled illegal by some, but legal if the ball moved even a millimeter off the ground ... there's your nit.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 01:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Against my better judgement ... what exactly are you disagreeing with me about, and how am I picking a nit at all... I'm saying let it go. The fact that the OP would be ruled illegal by some, but legal if the ball moved even a millimeter off the ground ... there's your nit.
soooo how far oob does a player have to be to be out of bounds...is a couple millimeters the same as being in?? or is a couple millimeters considered out?? : )
__________________
The officials lament, or the coaches excuses as it were: "I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you"
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 02:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Completely different - I think even you would agree... but to keep with your point ... if I can SEE that they have stepped out, they are out. And at least in that case you likely have the very best possible angle - and are likely looking right at it, as the player going down the sideline and whether he goes out or not is your primary focus, with everything else being watched peripherally.

If you're trying to imply, by this, that you can actually see whether that ball that looks like a completely legal snap to the other 5000 people in the stands did or did not rise a millimeter off the ground, then I would have 2 things for you. 1) Why are you looking RIGHT THERE - you've moved your focus from the other 10 things you're supposed to be watching at that moment... and 2) Please stand up and get your head off the ground, as that is the ONLY angle from which you could possibly be positive of your call.

All that said, however... that's not really my point. My point, really, is that I don't believe the rulesmakers EVER intended the officials to be differentiating between a snap that rolls and never leaves the ground and one that rises ever so minutely. There are several things that make a snap illegal. I truly don't believe that anyone EVER intended officials to cobble together the rules you've cobbled together to rule that a snap that for whatever reason (intent or just bad snap) does not actually leave the ground on it's way back to it's recipient is illegal ... while on that ever so infinitessimally does leave the ground is legal. (Nevermind that I don't buy the cobbling itself, don't believe that an official CAN (even if not doing his job correctly) make this determination, and don't believe that you SHOULD (while doing your job correctly) be looking at this nit to the expense of all the other far more important things you should be looking at.)
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 02:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Completely different - I think even you would agree... but to keep with your point ... if I can SEE that they have stepped out, they are out. And at least in that case you likely have the very best possible angle - and are likely looking right at it, as the player going down the sideline and whether he goes out or not is your primary focus, with everything else being watched peripherally.

If you're trying to imply, by this, that you can actually see whether that ball that looks like a completely legal snap to the other 5000 people in the stands did or did not rise a millimeter off the ground, then I would have 2 things for you. 1) Why are you looking RIGHT THERE - you've moved your focus from the other 10 things you're supposed to be watching at that moment... and 2) Please stand up and get your head off the ground, as that is the ONLY angle from which you could possibly be positive of your call.

All that said, however... that's not really my point. My point, really, is that I don't believe the rulesmakers EVER intended the officials to be differentiating between a snap that rolls and never leaves the ground and one that rises ever so minutely. There are several things that make a snap illegal. I truly don't believe that anyone EVER intended officials to cobble together the rules you've cobbled together to rule that a snap that for whatever reason (intent or just bad snap) does not actually leave the ground on it's way back to it's recipient is illegal ... while on that ever so infinitessimally does leave the ground is legal. (Nevermind that I don't buy the cobbling itself, don't believe that an official CAN (even if not doing his job correctly) make this determination, and don't believe that you SHOULD (while doing your job correctly) be looking at this nit to the expense of all the other far more important things you should be looking at.)
I don't know what position you work, but evidently it isn't umpire. The umpire is supposed to make sure we have a legal snap, so, it would be his job to make sure that it met the requirements.
As to cobbling rules together, I really don't think that is the case. Define a snap and you get to pass, define pass and you get the ball traveling in flight. As to picking nits that it need to be a millimeter off of the ground, I disagree completely. It needs to be visibly "passed" in a shotgun type formation. The nit picker would try to make the millimeter of flight legal, in my mind if it isn't clearly "passed" or handed then it is illegal.
__________________
The officials lament, or the coaches excuses as it were: "I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you"
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 01:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Against my better judgement ... what exactly are you disagreeing with me about, and how am I picking a nit at all... I'm saying let it go. The fact that the OP would be ruled illegal by some, but legal if the ball moved even a millimeter off the ground ... there's your nit.
But the same could be said about a snap that moves a mm backward, as opposed to one that doesn't. There was never specified a minimum distance backward the ball has to be snapped, so the determination must be made between something and nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 09:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: West Bend, WI
Posts: 336
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Or
b) backward from LOS but still under the center, without being touched by any other A player.


The snap ends when the ball hits the ground and it becomes a loose ball. Since the snap from the center touched the ground, the snap ended and it is a fumble. If recovered by the offense they may continue the play. It would be a loose ball. Team A could recover the loose ball and advance, as could B.

If the snapper were to fail to release the ball, you'd have an illegal snap. But if he immediately releases the ball and it is loose, I would keep the ball live. So in both (a) and (b) scenarios presented below, live ball.
__________________
"Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups...."
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 09:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canned Heat View Post
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Or
b) backward from LOS but still under the center, without being touched by any other A player.


The snap ends when the ball hits the ground and it becomes a loose ball. Since the snap from the center touched the ground, the snap ended and it is a fumble. If recovered by the offense they may continue the play. It would be a loose ball. Team A could recover the loose ball and advance, as could B.

If the snapper were to fail to release the ball, you'd have an illegal snap. But if he immediately releases the ball and it is loose, I would keep the ball live. So in both (a) and (b) scenarios presented below, live ball.
That's your "head football guy" at the state association? Wow.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 09:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canned Heat View Post
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Or
b) backward from LOS but still under the center, without being touched by any other A player.


The snap ends when the ball hits the ground and it becomes a loose ball. Since the snap from the center touched the ground, the snap ended and it is a fumble. If recovered by the offense they may continue the play. It would be a loose ball. Team A could recover the loose ball and advance, as could B.

If the snapper were to fail to release the ball, you'd have an illegal snap. But if he immediately releases the ball and it is loose, I would keep the ball live. So in both (a) and (b) scenarios presented below, live ball.
Wow. Heck... I'm in agreement with this being a live, legal snap... but honestly that reply is weak. Wouldn't you agree?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 09:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canned Heat View Post
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Or
b) backward from LOS but still under the center, without being touched by any other A player.

The snap ends when the ball hits the ground and it becomes a loose ball. Since the snap from the center touched the ground, the snap ended and it is a fumble. If recovered by the offense they may continue the play. It would be a loose ball. Team A could recover the loose ball and advance, as could B.

If the snapper were to fail to release the ball, you'd have an illegal snap. But if he immediately releases the ball and it is loose, I would keep the ball live. So in both (a) and (b) scenarios presented below, live ball.
I appreciate your diligence here CH and you do what your people tell you. My contention is that he never snapped it.
__________________
The officials lament, or the coaches excuses as it were: "I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you"
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 09:55am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canned Heat View Post
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Or
b) backward from LOS but still under the center, without being touched by any other A player.


The snap ends when the ball hits the ground and it becomes a loose ball. Since the snap from the center touched the ground, the snap ended and it is a fumble. If recovered by the offense they may continue the play. It would be a loose ball. Team A could recover the loose ball and advance, as could B.

If the snapper were to fail to release the ball, you'd have an illegal snap. But if he immediately releases the ball and it is loose, I would keep the ball live. So in both (a) and (b) scenarios presented below, live ball.
No offense to our "head football guy" but you're better off asking these questions to a group of officials who diligently study the rules. In other words, here.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canned Heat View Post
Posed two scenarios to our head football guy in WI at the WIAA....my question followed by his response.


[I]If the center (A55) snapped the ball back and it went; a) went straight back along the ground, loose bouncing back to the QB (A12) without getting airborne at all.
Is there some punctuation or something missing? How could it be at the same time "straight back along the ground", "without getting airborne at all", and yet "bouncing"? Was "rolling" or "skidding" meant rather than bouncing, or were these supposed to have been separate cases?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 14, 2011, 12:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
I agree if the snapper just spins the ball and rolls it, it is illegal snap, but he lofts it just a bit and rotates his wrist to make the ball land and roll it is legal.
The question in the OP concerned whether rolling the ball during the snap is legal. The answer, by rule, is no, because rolling the ball is neither handing nor passing.

If you're looking for a way around that, fine, but it doesn't change the answer. As an official, I'll be looking to see whether the snapper hands or passes the ball backward and otherwise complies with the snap requirements. As an official, I will use my judgment and decide whether to flag a snap as illegal.

Sometimes, you just gotta officiate.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1