The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)
-   -   numbering exceptions (https://forum.officiating.com/football/92407-numbering-exceptions.html)

parepat Mon Sep 17, 2012 01:49pm

In our area we do not enforce the numbering exception below varsity level. It has never been a problem to be honest with you.

CT1 Mon Sep 17, 2012 02:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by hlin nc (Post 854653)
steven,

you have recited what we call in the business "the offense that shall be nameless" but what he called the a11 offense in which all offensive players were allegedly eligible based on formation and numbering attempting to skirt the scrimmage kick formation exception.

The nfhs legislated it out..

fify.

jchamp Mon Sep 17, 2012 04:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler (Post 854646)
Wasn't there a high school coach a few years back touting a new offense?

If you wonder HOW the NFHS legislated it out, take a look in the rules book at 7-2-5b Exceptions. It is a bizarre kluge of rules designed specifically to eliminate that offensive scheme. I was in Central New York near Utica when it was being "developed". The consensus there among the veterans, especially the umpires and back judges, was that communicating and determining who would be an eligible receiver would be a nightmare.

The purpose for the numbering exception was to allow different squads from the normal linemen to take the field during scrimmage kick downs, and the evil offense took advantage of a loophole (even bragged about it) to do something different.

These combined to ensure NFHS eliminated it, I think that happened in 2009.

When I was playing in 7th and 8th grade, we only had between 13 and 19 players on my team depending on how much we had been affected by grades. (2 D's or 1 F and you were pulled from the team.) Two of us would change jerseys FREQENTLY on the sideline depending on what was going on. I was either 79 or 49, and I can't remember my teammate's two numbers, I think 78 and 88. The coach would notify the WH and the opposing coaches every week. These were generally friendly games, anyways--same three officials every week and always played on the same field on Saturday mornings.

HLin NC Mon Sep 17, 2012 07:43pm

Quote:

"the offense that shall be nameless"

Quote:

fify.
Actually you didn't. I left out the "Not" in "Shall Not Be Named". Thanks anyway.

We do not allow "numbering exceptions" past youth league.

Robert Goodman Tue Sep 18, 2012 08:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchamp (Post 854895)
If you wonder HOW the NFHS legislated it out, take a look in the rules book at 7-2-5b Exceptions. It is a bizarre kluge of rules designed specifically to eliminate that offensive scheme....

The purpose for the numbering exception was to allow different squads from the normal linemen to take the field during scrimmage kick downs,

The bizarre kludge resulted because that exception was retained, so it's a complicated exception to the exception. Fed could instead have eliminated the exception entirely, or eliminated eligible receiver numbering entirely, and either would've given a lot simpler result. The difficulty in administering the A-11 was because of the interaction of the already somewhat complicated exception with the eligible receiver numbering rules. If they'd just eliminated the scrimmage kick exception, they could've gone back to the days of pullover jerseys; or they could've eliminated eligible receiver numbering, and gone back to the days of tackle eligible etc. plays.

bkdow Tue Sep 18, 2012 09:54pm

We have a lot of schools hurting for money in inner-city schools. Sometimes you have a kid who is playing varsity as a 50-79 player but JV as a qb or wide receiver. It is understood and widley accepted here that the position a player lines up in determines his eligibility. This is JV and below and usually in a financially challenged area.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:45pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1