Anyone got a foul?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If you want to pick this nit, than just blow it dead for an illegal substitution, certainly don't wait for this to be a live ball foul and wait for the score to happens to bring it back. As I said earlier he was really close to the numbers(9 yd mark).

Agreed.

[bigjohn]

If he didn't come from the sideline I may agree but it is borderline IP!

d. To use a player, replaced player, substitute, coach, athletic trainer or other
attendant in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents
at or immediately before the snap or free kick.

[bigjohn]

remember the nfhs defines immediately as 3-5 seconds!

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

If he didn't come from the sideline I may agree but it is borderline IP!

d. To use a player, replaced player, substitute, coach, athletic trainer or other
attendant in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents
at or immediately before the snap or free kick.

Originally Posted by bigjohn

remember the nfhs defines immediately as 3-5 seconds!

The three to five seconds applies to huddles, in my opinion. They never had 11 on the field so that dog doesn't hunt. And it wasn't immediately before the snap. They got set, made sure they were in a legal formation, and ran the play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

If he didn't come from the sideline I may agree but it is borderline IP!

d. To use a player, replaced player, substitute, coach, athletic trainer or other
attendant in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents
at or immediately before the snap or free kick.

No way this was an attempt to deceive.

My 8 year old son's knock knock jokes are more deceptive than that substitution was.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

If he didn't come from the sideline I may agree but it is borderline IP!

d. To use a player, replaced player, substitute, coach, athletic trainer or other
attendant in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents
at or immediately before the snap or free kick.

Please give an example of the player who was deceived in this play.

[bigjohn]

RULING: False start by A1 in both (a) and (b). These
are acts interpreted to cause an opponent to encroach and, therefore, are
infractions. It is the intent of the rules to prohibit such acts. Whether or not the
action by A1 draws B into the neutral zone should not be the determining factor
in ruling a false-start foul. The action by A1 in (c) is legal. (7-1-7b)

Same logic in my book!!!

[Adam]

The rule you quoted specifies "to deceive..."

If I'm going to flag someone based on that rule, I have to be able to tell it was an attempt to deceive. In order for that to happen, there's going to have to be some actual deception. Or at least a decent chance of deception.

There's neither here. No one was deceived. No one could have been deceived. The player made it close enough to the 9s that you really can't tell if he made it or not.

So, I see neither an attempt to deceive, nor even a technical breaking of the rules. What's the call again?

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I see this as a requirement (inside the 9 yard mark), no different than everyone must be set for 1 full second before someone goes into motion or the ball is snapped. I notice that one is let go a good bit as well!

REPLY: The key word in your reply is "I." The fact that you see it as a requirement is whole lot less weighty than the fact that probably 90-95% of officials have either figured it out on their own or have been told in no uncertain terms to ignore this if the defense matches up and there's no confusion or disadvantage to the defense. If my supervisor has told me that, and I see it happen, what do you think I'm going to do? Can you see me explaining to him that I had a flag because Bigjohn sees this as a requirement? Just like 'overlooking' a hold by the WR on the left side of the formation when the play is a sweep to the right, we officiate to advantage-disadvantage. Technically, the offense in the play fouled--no question. But 'technically' isn't the only way we're taught to officiate.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: The key word in your reply is "I." The fact that you see it as a requirement is whole lot less weighty than the fact that probably 90-95% of officials have either figured it out on their own or have been told in no uncertain terms to ignore this if the defense matches up and there's no confusion or disadvantage to the defense. If my supervisor has told me that, and I see it happen, what do you think I'm going to do? Can you see me explaining to him that I had a flag because Bigjohn sees this as a requirement? Just like 'overlooking' a hold by the WR on the left side of the formation when the play is a sweep to the right, we officiate to advantage-disadvantage. Technically, the offense in the play fouled--no question. But 'technically' isn't the only way we're taught to officiate.

Well said.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

Technically, the offense in the play fouled--no question. But 'technically' isn't the only way we're taught to officiate.

Bob, I'm not convinced they fouled, technically speaking. Are you saying the sub didn't make it to the 9 yard mark?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Adam

Bob, I'm not convinced they fouled, technically speaking. Are you saying the sub didn't make it to the 9 yard mark?

This is the essence of the original post. Big John is saying he didn't make it to the 9 yd mark, making it an illegal formation, or he is saying it is an attempt to deceive, because he came in late.

[jfurdell]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: The key word in your reply is "I." The fact that you see it as a requirement is whole lot less weighty than the fact that probably 90-95% of officials have either figured it out on their own or have been told in no uncertain terms to ignore this if the defense matches up and there's no confusion or disadvantage to the defense. If my supervisor has told me that, and I see it happen, what do you think I'm going to do? Can you see me explaining to him that I had a flag because Bigjohn sees this as a requirement? Just like 'overlooking' a hold by the WR on the left side of the formation when the play is a sweep to the right, we officiate to advantage-disadvantage. Technically, the offense in the play fouled--no question. But 'technically' isn't the only way we're taught to officiate.

THIS. Times one thousand million.

Possible nearest burn unit:
Burn Care

[STEVED21]

After watching the play a few times, I noticed the late sub isn't even involved in the play. He runs straight down the field and never touches the ball. Even took a defender with him. Obviously no deception.

[Canned Heat]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

well said.

Peace

+1