Anyone got a foul?
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/wQ1W9d15ZBE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Possibly illegal substitution, but both receivers on that side were covered.

Probably is an illegal substitution, as the last guy on didn't get inside the nine yd mark, but he is really close

For FED rules, yeah, that's how we call it around here also... basically, if the defense sees the substitute and can get him covered, we let it go.

NCAA, you'd have to give the defense a match-up opportunity, which may or may not have caused the play clock to expire...

Not in real life practice.

Peace

No foul. The defense obviously adjusted their coverage to account for the late sub.

+1

It is still illegal formation and you would call it if they didn't have 7 on the ball wouldn't you?


Never understood why this was part of Art 5
a. At the snap, at least seven A players shall be on their line of scrimmage. since the foul is illegal numbering and I think this should be illegal formation.

This isn't an illegal formation. They have 7 on the line at the time of the snap. 5 interior lineman and the two outside receivers. I don't see any numbering issues either.

Rule 7
SECTION 2 FORMATION/POSITION, NUMBERING AND ACTION AT THE SNAP
ART. 1 . . . After the ball is marked ready for play, each player of A who participated
in the previous down and each substitute for A must have been,
momentarily, between the 9-yard marks, before the snap.

PENALTY: Illegal formation (Arts. 1, 2, 3) – (S19); illegal snap (Art. 4) – (S7-
19); illegal numbering (Art. 5) – (S19); illegal shift (Art. 6) – (S20); illegal
motion (Art. 7) – (S20); planned loose-ball infraction (Art. 8) – (S19) – 5 yards.

Still not going to get called unless B doesn't cover the receivers who never make it back inside the 9s.

Except maybe by overzealous new officials who don't know any better.

.....Or by coaches or ex-coaches who have never sat in a rules meeting or clinic and discussed this rule and why it was written.

For if they had, they would have been told countless times (as mentioned prior) if the player is covered defensively, and it's obvious that it has not created a confusion for the defense, then the spirit of this rule has not been violated and we move on.

In this play, the defender adjusts to the receiver lined up in the slot, the defender covers him and releases him when he reads the potential for a fake on the initial pitch. (he does his job and stays home momentarily)

Unfortunately, a couple of his teammates did not realize the potential for either pitch and ended up inside the hashes leaving the near side zone to the camera vacant. They over-committed to the original receiver and the rest is history.

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! :rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

No way this was an attempt to deceive.

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

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

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!!!

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?

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

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.

THIS. Times one thousand million.

Possible nearest burn unit:
Burn Care

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.

+1

I hear you ... but if you're looking to THIS rule to make it illegal, you're ignoring both the "to deceive opponents" (which obviously they didn't - the defense covered him) and the "at or immediately before the snap" part (There was plenty of time between him coming to his position and the snap.