I would flag this. This isn't a natural motion, and is strictly being done to distract the defense. I would also flag swinging of the arms, if excessive, by the recievers. I would not flag a head turn or slight movements if not done in a manner to simulate the start of the play. This would be one of those "spirit of the rule" situations and not a "letter of the law" .

From 2012 POE

ILLEGAL SHIFTS INVOLVING THE QUARTERBACK
As today’s offensive formations continue to become more complex, it must be stressed to all coaches and game
officials the need to eliminate illegal shifts involving the quarterback. Whenever any player on the offensive
team moves to a new position after the ready-for-play signal and before the snap, it is a shift (NFHS Football
Rule 2-39). Coaches and game officials must recognize that certain movements by quarterbacks must also be
penalized as illegal shifts.
There are several examples of movements by the quarterback that would be considered an illegal shift, such as
when all offensive players immediately get into their stance and then the quarterback receives the snap as soon

as he/she gets their hands under center. This is illegal because the quarterback needs to be set for one second
prior to the snap after the linemen going into stance as this is, in fact, a shift. An illegal-shift foul also occurs
when the quarterback first sends a player in motion and after the player is in motion, the quarterback then goes
under center to receive the snap.
When all other offensive players are set, movements by the quarterback, other than slightly moving a foot to
start another player in motion, must be followed by a pause of one second by everyone on the offense to be
considered a legal shift. If the offense is allowed to execute illegal shifts or other movements, teams will gain
an advantage not intended by the rules and will disrupt the desired balance between offense and defense.

I would have to see this, but I do not think that is the intention of the rule. Players even on the LOS in the line move their heads around as they are often communicating blocking schemes or listening to a play call and it is not common to call a foul on those movements.

For all you know that signal might have been an indication of what route they were to run or combination. I have little problem with this based on what I am reading. It might have looked worse in person, but I cannot imagine just that signal alone drawing a flag from me. Maybe if it drew some reaction, but receivers often make signals to their teammates or to the wing trying to get lined up.

Peace

Thanks for stepping up and (mis)defining this for us. Since clinics have been telling me the opposite of what you just said, we've all been doing this wrong for years. Now that we have the on-high definitive interpretation from someone with your vast experience both on the field and in meetings with TPTB, we can start ruling correctly again.

I hear you, but I don't see "distract the defense" as either the reason or a problem. Receivers and backs hand signal to each other all the time. Yes, this one is more blatant and more visible - but why in the world would it distract the defense or affect them at all. We don't make them reset every time someone turns a head or swings an arm. Only motion that simulated the snap should be flagged (excepting, of course, moving forward). I highly doubt that the spirit of the rule was to prevent this - it was done to let the defense be aware that the snap is imminent and to prevent any advantage. The 1-second stop does the former, and the actions described give no advantage.

So 7-1-7b REFANDUMP?

or flat out 9-9-5

If we decide this is legal, are we going to allow "butt bobbing" by an offensive lineman or not ?? How much and what type of movement is legal and doesn't draw a flag. I think this comes down to the intent of the rulesmakers and not the "letter of the law" as written in the book. If they wanted to do this "traveling" signal to signal something to their quarterback, they would be welcome to do this before stopping for a second and then running their play. In this situation, they are doing it strictly as a distraction in a method that the rulesmakers do not intend, in my opinion. I still feel a flag is appropriate. I would call illegal procedure, although there may be just cause to rule this unsportsmanlike conduct.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

Completely legal.

yeah, go Canada!

Canadian Experts Call for Nationwide Ban on Spanking | Team Mom - Yahoo! Shine

What possible advantage are they gaining by this?

What in the hell does this have to do with this discussion at hand?

Also, I don't buy that the defense is going to be distracted in any material way from this action.

About as much as the Canadian Ruling does!!!!!

:D

1. Moving your hands is not a shift.

2. No it doesn't.

You're making stuff up. "Not a natural motion" and "distracting the defense" are not illegal. Doing stuff the official doesn't like or doesn't think is "proper football" is also not illegal.

Spirit of what rule? There's just no advantage to this.

I don't think I'm making stuff up at all. We're told all the time to officiate to the spirit of the rules and not the letter of the law. If they have people standing out there waving their arms or dancing, you're telling me that these aren't flagged unless their feet move or they go forward. I go back to my previous post regarding linemen "butt bobbing". Do we not flag that either ?? What criteria do we use to determine what movements are legal and what aren't. We have to use common sense and only allow movements that are common to the game, otherwise we have a travesty being created out there.