The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 17, 2013, 03:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by jTheUmp View Post
Were you at Honig's clinic this spring? I was there also... if we both end up there next year we should get together for a beer or two.

But a punter isn't a punter until he actually punts the ball. Prior to that, he's just a runner. Likewise, the quarterback is just a runner until he actually throws a pass.

Agreed.
Not this year but I've been a few times. Great clinic!

I agree. I'm talking more in general terms which is how Rogers described it. You would notice this if the QB left after 4th down and a different player comes in with the same number and lines up as a punter.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 17, 2013, 03:35pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by jTheUmp View Post
Unless I can be ABSOLUTELY sure that the QB #16 and Punter #16 are not the same person, no, I do not have a foul.

In high school I played against a team whose quarterback was also their punter. Why can't a player, if appropriately skilled, do both?
The point is, if your regular punter is 18, and your backup qb is 18, you can easily deceive the defense by sending in your backup qb to line up as your regular punter.
The defense is going to assume it's a punt and defend accordingly.

OTOH, at the college level, there shouldn't be any surprises after about week 2.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 17, 2013, 03:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
The point is, if your regular punter is 18, and your backup qb is 18, you can easily deceive the defense by sending in your backup qb to line up as your regular punter.
The defense is going to assume it's a punt and defend accordingly.

OTOH, at the college level, there shouldn't be any surprises after about week 2.
Which is pretty much what happened in this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 17, 2013, 04:44pm
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
How did the QB "sneak" onto the field if he was already on the field? Did he leave with the group, but then turn around and come back?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 17, 2013, 05:31pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
How did the QB "sneak" onto the field if he was already on the field? Did he leave with the group, but then turn around and come back?
Pretty easy if he is the 2nd string QB and comes on with the punt team.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:07am
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Pretty easy if he is the 2nd string QB and comes on with the punt team.
Two things... 1 - the OP said it was the starter.

2 - QB and Punter are two different positions ... the rule clearly says you can't have two guys at the same position with the same number during a game. If this 2nd guy actually punted ... THEN you have a broken rule.

Perhaps the rule should be written to also say that two players with the same number cannot take snaps from center during the game. But currently, it does not state this.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 08:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by parepat View Post
Did the QB run play from punt formation or shift to a conventional formation? Doesn't really matter to me. I believe it is a foul either way, but trying to get the facts straight.
The play was run from the punt formation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Two things... 1 - the OP said it was the starter.

2 - QB and Punter are two different positions ... the rule clearly says you can't have two guys at the same position with the same number during a game. If this 2nd guy actually punted ... THEN you have a broken rule.

Perhaps the rule should be written to also say that two players with the same number cannot take snaps from center during the game. But currently, it does not state this.
1 - Right it was the starter. In this situation there was no substitution. Normally #18 - QB leaves and #18 - P comes on the field for 4th down punts but in this play #18 - QB stays on the field.

2 - Are they though under the rules? The rule has teeth in that the penalty is fairly severe, but it has no structure in that it's basically impossible to enforce since the rules don't define what positions are.

I also agree that it's basically unenforceable by the crew during the game due to the difficulty of confirming the separate identities particularly across long periods of time.

In the end I think it's a good idea turned into a badly written rule. I think this should be a violation but it's not entirely clear whether it is or not and even if it is, it would take an extraordinary effort by the crew to get it.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 09:21am
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
So ... given the situation you describe - and assuming you think some violation of this rule occurred --- exactly when do you penalize?

A18 QB's plays 1-3 of a series, then the other A18 comes on and punts. Penalty then? I suspect you're saying no. It's clear QB and punter are different positions.

Later, A18 QB's plays 1-3 of a series, then stays on the field for 4th down as several other substitutions occur, and then lines up a bit deeper but plays ... quarterback, like he did the rest of the game ... and throws a pass. Penalize then? Sounds like that's when you want the penalty to occur - but how is a QB staying on the field to play QB a violation of this rule?

Yes - the entire fault in all this is the poorly worded rule and the lack of definition or even caseplay to go by. But if the rule was worded correctly, I still don't see a foul here (perhaps if the rule was worded differently, the foul would actually be when the punter came out the first time and punted.)
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 12:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
So ... given the situation you describe - and assuming you think some violation of this rule occurred --- exactly when do you penalize?

A18 QB's plays 1-3 of a series, then the other A18 comes on and punts. Penalty then? I suspect you're saying no. It's clear QB and punter are different positions.

Later, A18 QB's plays 1-3 of a series, then stays on the field for 4th down as several other substitutions occur, and then lines up a bit deeper but plays ... quarterback, like he did the rest of the game ... and throws a pass. Penalize then? Sounds like that's when you want the penalty to occur - but how is a QB staying on the field to play QB a violation of this rule?

Yes - the entire fault in all this is the poorly worded rule and the lack of definition or even caseplay to go by. But if the rule was worded correctly, I still don't see a foul here (perhaps if the rule was worded differently, the foul would actually be when the punter came out the first time and punted.)
I'll remind you that I am not a football referee.

The prohibition on offense should be on eligible receivers wearing identical numbers during the game. I believe that would solve this problem (and the foul would be when the punter took the field in this revised instance).

Now, in this case I would stipulate the following assumptions:
1. The intent of the rule is to prevent misidentification between players.
2. Punter is a position which is occupied by the player who usually punts the ball in a scrimmage-kick formation.
3. Quarterback is a position which is occupied by the player who typically receives the snap in a non-scrimmage-kick formation.

If we take these stipulations as true (and you may well not), the rule is violated when #16-QB takes the position of punter.

In reality, you've convinced me this rule is all together unenforcable and needs completely rewritten.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 12:32pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
I'll remind you that I am not a football referee.

The prohibition on offense should be on eligible receivers wearing identical numbers during the game. I believe that would solve this problem (and the foul would be when the punter took the field in this revised instance).

Now, in this case I would stipulate the following assumptions:
1. The intent of the rule is to prevent misidentification between players.
2. Punter is a position which is occupied by the player who usually punts the ball in a scrimmage-kick formation.
3. Quarterback is a position which is occupied by the player who typically receives the snap in a non-scrimmage-kick formation.

If we take these stipulations as true (and you may well not), the rule is violated when #16-QB takes the position of punter.

In reality, you've convinced me this rule is all together unenforcable and needs completely rewritten.
Again at the college level you might have multiple scholarship players that might have same numbers and this is not every going to be an issue. I also think the rule is so that you do not throw out the same CB that might have the same number as well. The offense needs to identify defensive players theoretically too.

As stated, I think this rule is more administrative in nature, meaning that if any penalty is going to come, it will come from a league or conference to enforce some sanction. Otherwise right now there does not seem to be a subscribed penalty to give if we notice two players are at the same position.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 01:01pm
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
As stated, I think this rule is more administrative in nature, meaning that if any penalty is going to come, it will come from a league or conference to enforce some sanction. Otherwise right now there does not seem to be a subscribed penalty to give if we notice two players are at the same position.

Peace
Exactly this.. imho.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:27pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Two things... 1 - the OP said it was the starter.
I didn't see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
First, I'm not a football referee so just looking for some information here.

NCAA says "Two players playing the same position may not wear the same number during the game."

In the Cal/OSU game, the Cal QB and the Cal punter both are wearing 16. In the second quarter, the quarterback lines up as the punter in a kicking formation. Is this a violation of the rule? Why or why not?
Wait, here it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
1 - Right it was the starter. In this situation there was no substitution. Normally #18 - QB leaves and #18 - P comes on the field for 4th down punts but in this play #18 - QB stays on the field.

2 - Are they though under the rules? The rule has teeth in that the penalty is fairly severe, but it has no structure in that it's basically impossible to enforce since the rules don't define what positions are.

I also agree that it's basically unenforceable by the crew during the game due to the difficulty of confirming the separate identities particularly across long periods of time.

In the end I think it's a good idea turned into a badly written rule. I think this should be a violation but it's not entirely clear whether it is or not and even if it is, it would take an extraordinary effort by the crew to get it.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 19, 2013, 07:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
Again at the college level you might have multiple scholarship players that might have same numbers and this is not every going to be an issue. I also think the rule is so that you do not throw out the same CB that might have the same number as well. The offense needs to identify defensive players theoretically too.

As stated, I think this rule is more administrative in nature, meaning that if any penalty is going to come, it will come from a league or conference to enforce some sanction. Otherwise right now there does not seem to be a subscribed penalty to give if we notice two players are at the same position.

Peace
The subscribed penalty is on FR-21 of the 2013-2014 Football rulesbook
Quote:
e. Two players playing the same position may not wear the same number during
the game.
PENALTY [d-e]—Live-ball foul, unsportsmanlike conduct. 15 yards from
the previous spot [S27]. Flagrant offenders shall be disqualified
[S47].
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 19, 2013, 07:11am
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,602
Coaches response: "But he's NOT my punter, he's my quarterback. We're in shotgun!"/ "He's not my quarterback, he's my punter" "can't you see we're in scrimmage kick formation?!" "$#@^%$, I'm calling the conference office tonight!"
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 19, 2013, 11:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
In the end I think it's a good idea turned into a badly written rule.
They should just mandate unique numbers for different players in the game and allow 3 digit numbers. The 3rd digit should come after the decimal point.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Illegal number and penalty question? JRutledge Basketball 15 Wed Feb 27, 2013 05:40pm
Duplicate numbers ?? Remington Basketball 10 Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:53am
Illegal number Question BigGref Football 9 Fri Sep 02, 2005 02:50pm
Duplicate Number bard Basketball 25 Sat Dec 07, 2002 09:32am
Duplicate numbers Hawks Coach Basketball 11 Fri Jan 05, 2001 09:46am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:35pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1