Questions on Part I Exam

[lawref]

Does anyone have the answers to these questions on the Part I exam? I'm stumped:
65 (I think there's a misprint on the test)
67
80
82
Thanks, guys!

[BktBallRef]

Yep, I've got'em!

65 should read 80-99. It's a typo. Answer it based on 80-99.

[cowbyfan1]

yeah 65 is a typo use 80-99
67 - won't give you an answer but what determine if a player is on the line or a back??
80 - look under possession and kicks..
82 - look under force, safety and touchback.

These are simple if you look in the rules book..

[alabamabluezebra]

65-True 7-5-6a

67-False 2-30-3;7-2-3

80-False 6-1-5

82-True 2-13-3;8-5-1

[cmathews]

in 65 the numbering is of little consequence anyway the answer is the same.... or am I missing something... aren't interior linemen always ineligible recievers??

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by cmathews
in 65 the numbering is of little consequence anyway the answer is the same.... or am I missing something... aren't interior linemen always ineligible recievers??

REPLY: Correct. The answer would be the same whether or not the typo was there.

[Schultj]

67 is a true definition of a QB, but not all A backs. That is what makes it false, correct?

[STEVED21]

It's actually the definition of a lineman.