Page 4 of 5

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:18 pm
by Great White
ORIGINAL: Marauders

This is an exception that is in Canadian rules that was worth going over for community members who may be designing plays for the Canadian ruleset.

[font="Courier New"]Fine, just not in context of what has been strongly disagreed about, in this thread. Without why it was posted, within a thread involving strong disagreement involving USAn FootBall.[/font]

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:27 pm
by Marauders
Maybe you have not been reading this thread very closely, as the only one with any disagreement is you.
 
No one is perfect, as the NFL and College have differing rules at times, but this is pretty straight forward.  Because the CFL has an exeption to the rule does not mean anything stated about the rules in American outdoor football are in disagreement.
 
By the way, most indoor leagues allow one player in motion at least one yard from the line of scrimmage, and forward motion is allowed.  Unlike outdoor rules, this may change a bit from league to league.
 

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:32 pm
by Shaggyra
I'm still waiting to find out what [font="courier new"]USAn is.[/font]

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:41 am
by Marauders
Anyone watching the Vikings vs Packers tonight will note that the Vikings did a two man shift, but they hiked the ball prior to being set for one second.
 
It negated a twelve yard pass with the penalty.
 
 

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 2:37 am
by Great White
[font="courier new"]Marauders[/font][font="courier new"],[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
By the way, most indoor leagues allow one player in motion at least one yard from the line of scrimmage, and forward motion is allowed. Unlike outdoor rules, this may change a bit from league to league.

[font="courier new"]Yeah, I knew that one.
[/font]
Anyone watching the Vikings vs Packers tonight will note that the Vikings did a two man shift, but they hiked the ball prior to being set for one second.

It negated a twelve yard pass with the penalty.


              
[font="courier new"]Makes sense. It was also called again, at the 7:10 time in the 4rd-quarter; however, head referee said, two-men inmotion without getting set. My understand is 2-men cannot be in motion/shift at the same time, unless to maintain 7-Man Line.
[/font]

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:21 am
by Marauders
In American football, if two men are in motion at one time, they are in a shift.  It is legal for two running backs to shift from and I Formation to a Split Formation as long as they set for one second prior to the snap.

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:50 pm
by Great White
[font="Courier New"]Marauders,

Your right and I am wrong, now I remember The Old 80's NFL Franchises used to have their two-RBs shifting from the I-Formation to the Pro Set Formation.
[/font]

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:29 am
by coachmark
Canadian Rule Book for Tackle Football
Rule 4 Section 2 Article 2a

“The Player who, at the snap of the ball is occupying a position at the either end of the line of scrimmage may be in motion while within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage but must not be moving towards the opponent’s goal line when the ball is put into play.”

TE could be moving out, SE could be moving in. Both could move at same time.

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:44 pm
by Great White
[font="courier new"]coachmark[/font][font="courier new"],[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]          Since, I do not get a chance to keep up with non-USAn FB; I will agree with what you guys know about CFL rules.[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]Everyone else,[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]              If you were watching The Inadianapolis Colts win[:(] of The Miami Dolphins[:@], then you saw one of our debates and one of questions to The NFL's rules committee solved; Colts' DT/FB Kelico caught a pass (touchdown[8|]) after lining up at FB and he is listed as a DT. Thus, I am going to assume OL can do the same. Plus, I heard no, referee declare that Colts' DT/FB Kelico was eligiable for a pass[X(], probably not necessary for him to declare himslef to the referee or the TV coverage missed it-which highl doubt.[/font]

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 1:54 am
by Marauders
If you were watching The Inadianapolis Colts win of The Miami Dolphins, then you saw one of our debates and one of questions to The NFL's rules committee solved; Colts' DT/FB Klecko caught a pass (touchdown) after lining up at FB and he is listed as a DT. Thus, I am going to assume OL can do the same.

There is no debate really, and that play is a good example of an NFL lineman being declared eligible, but it isn't a player on the line.  Dan Klecko declared himself to the official to make his number (61) eligible for the play, and set up as a fullback.

Randall McDaniel (offensive guard for the Minnesota Vikings) and William Perry (Chicago Bear's defensive tackle) often lined up in the fullback position. Other jumbo packages do that as well.
I heard no, referee declare that Colts' DT/FB Klecko was eligible for a pass, probably not necessary for him to declare himslef to the referee or the TV coverage missed it - which highly doubt.

The TV broadcasts often don't play that. If Klecko caught the ball without a flag being thrown, there is no doubt that he was declared eligible.

RE: man in motion bug???

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:04 am
by Brockleigh
Canadian Rule Book for Tackle Football
Rule 4 Section 2 Article 2a

“The Player who, at the snap of the ball is occupying a position at the either end of the line of scrimmage may be in motion while within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage but must not be moving towards the opponent’s goal line when the ball is put into play.”

TE could be moving out, SE could be moving in. Both could move at same time.

This rule is taken from an Amateur Football rulebook. Rule 4, Section 2, Article 2 of the CFL rulebook covers Illegal Movement, but it is limited to what amounts to Illegal Procedure by the Quarterback.

I wanted to dispute the statement by coachmark that an end may be in lateral motion, but after having looked through all relevant sections of the CFL rulebook, I cannot find any rule restricts an end from moving laterally prior to or at the snap of the ball. The only limitation to Line Players (of which ends are included) that I can find staes that a player in a 3 or 4 point stance must remain motionless until the snap of the ball. That's all.

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:04 am
by Marauders
“The Player who, at the snap of the ball is occupying a position at the either end of the line of scrimmage may be in motion while within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage but must not be moving towards the opponent’s goal line when the ball is put into play.”

TE could be moving out, SE could be moving in. Both could move at same time.
 
Coachmark and Brockleigh, thank you for posting these rules clarifications.  These should add another twist to Canadian rules playbooks. 

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:50 pm
by Great White
ORIGINAL: Marauders
If you were watching The Inadianapolis Colts win of The Miami Dolphins, then you saw one of our debates and one of questions to The NFL's rules committee solved; Colts' DT/FB Klecko caught a pass (touchdown) after lining up at FB and he is listed as a DT. Thus, I am going to assume OL can do the same.

There is no debate really, and that play is a good example of an NFL lineman being declared eligible, but it isn't a player on the line.  Dan Klecko declared himself to the official to make his number (61) eligible for the play, and set up as a fullback.

[font="Courier New"]Okay, here I am as a ineligiable TE, but now I am going to have the Referee announce I am eligiable as I move to reline-up at FB (in case you cannot find me); any body else not find this stupid? When all I would have to do line-up at FB (which all other non-skill players playing FB do).[/font]
I heard no, referee declare that Colts' DT/FB Klecko was eligible for a pass, probably not necessary for him to declare himslef to the referee or the TV coverage missed it - which highly doubt.

[font="Courier New"]I have changed my mind, they would not miss that.[/font]
The TV broadcasts often don't play that. If Klecko caught the ball without a flag being thrown, there is no doubt that he was declared eligible.

[font="Courier New"]You will have to excuse me if I get mad while typing this post, 6th attempt to get it posted get extremely frustrating. Plus add on to that *.

1st. Media broadcasts always broadcast that happening.

2nd. Klecko is know the famous example of what we are talking about, for the TV broadcast to miss him declaring himself egiliable who be laughable by college students studying broadcasting 101.

3rd. Even when I was in FIU Radio broadcsting, The FIU FB broadcasting team wanted the extra FIU Radio broadcasting members to do spotting to help them, I have done it myself. Spotters are the people who tell the producer (affecting what the camera shows us) and broadcasting team (from radio through TV) which players are on the field and in the huddle, where the ball is and if it is a first-down, touchdown and etc. For a group of spotters to miss DT Klecko from being on the field, or in the huddle and walking to the referee to declare himself egiliable reciever would be a risk to their jobs. It would be like Joan Rivers waiting to interview a lead actor in a B rated movie's screening; but never interviewing him, because her spotters missed his car coming-up, as she interview the lead actress.

Lastly, since I believe the declaration of eligiability did not happen and referees would not make that mistake, that a declaration of eligiability is not necessary, unless he lines-up on The LOS. It makes complete when you examine it. Non-skill players (especially OLman) next 5-other OLmen are hidden; however, non-skill players lined-up in a position eligiable to catch a pass (at any formation) and regularly catches a pass a game is obvious. How could a defender not recognize it and still play at any level above HS.
[/font]
Randall McDaniel (offensive guard for the Minnesota Vikings) and William Perry (Chicago Bear's defensive tackle) often lined up in the fullback position. Other jumbo packages do that as well.

[font="Courier New"]*This just gets me a little, because you should already know I have watch CFB Div. 1A and The NFL since 1979 (probably longer than most here and maybe even you), yet you post this? One is the most famous example non-skilled players playing FB/RB. Yet, it is also irrelevent since neither ever cuaght a pass, from that possition, probably never caught a pass.[/font]

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:31 pm
by JasonninTN
Actually I remember Perry catching a pass (at least once, maybe more times than that). I've also been following 1-A and the pros since about '79, btw.

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:28 pm
by Great White
[font="courier new"]JasonninTN[/font][font="courier new"],[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]                                With all due respect to you, I think you way wrong; I cannot remember a single pass thrown any of there ways.[/font]

RE: man in motion

Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:18 pm
by Marauders
With all due respect to you, I think you way wrong; I cannot remember a single pass thrown any of there ways.

William Perry - Chicago Bears

....... Rushing ................... Receiving
Year Att Yds Avg Lg TD .... Rec Yds Avg Lg TD
1985 05 07 1.4 02 02 ...... 01 04 4.0 04t 01


Dan Klecko did this for the Patriots prior to the Colts. The Patriots had thrown TD passes to LB Mike Vrabel and used Dan Klecko at fullback.

Dan Klecko - Indianapolis Colts

...................... Receiving Stats
YEAR TEAM REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD FUM LOST
2003 NWE 0 00 0.0 00 0 0 0 0
2004 NWE 3 18 6.0 11 0 1 1 1
2006 IND . 1 02 2.0 02 1 1 0 0
Career ..... 4 20 5.0 11 1 2 1 1

Lastly, since I believe the declaration of eligiability did not happen and referees would not make that mistake, that a declaration of eligiability is not necessary, unless he lines-up on The LOS. It makes complete when you examine it. Non-skill players (especially OLman) next 5-other OLmen are hidden; however, non-skill players lined-up in a position eligiable to catch a pass (at any formation) and regularly catches a pass a game is obvious.

There are two eligibility requirements: the jersey number and the position on the field.

Klecko's number was ineligible, so he was required to report and be declared eligible.

After that, as long as he did not line up on the inside line, he was eligible to catch a pass.


Logic Table

A and B are both necessary conditions.

A=T B=T C=T
A=F B=T C=F
A=T B=F C=F
A=F B=F C=F

A: eligible uniform number
B: eligible position
C: eligible to catch a pass
T: True
F: False


Player Numbers by Position
(NFL Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4)

All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3c (see NOTE 1), and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: quarterbacks, punters, and placekickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned); running backs and defensive backs, 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable); offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman, 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers 50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

NOTES:

5, 3, 3c has to do with the size and placement of the numerals
7, 2, 3 rules regarding notifying the referee of eligibility if wearing and ineligible number for a position. Any player wearing an eligible number at a pass receiving position (running backs, tight ends, and wide receivers) can play any eligible pass receiving position without reporting to the referee. That is, running backs can line up as wide receivers or tight ends, and players wearing wide receiver and/or tight end numbers can line up in the backfield without having to report to the referee.

RE: man in motion

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:29 pm
by firebirds
Once the report is made to the official he then notifies the defense on the field and the notification is also relayed to the defensive team's sideline. The official has no other notification obligations to make. He is not required to notify the fans in the stadium nor inform any media members who may be covering the game. If the official does make a "public notification", as I have witnessed in the past, it is as a gratuity and usually done during a critical point in the game or when the crowd is very loud.

RE: man in motion

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:57 pm
by Great White
[font="courier new"]firebirds[/font][font="courier new"],[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]           If you watch when these plays happen the head referees have always announced facing the defenses' sidelines. Just keep it a secret for the players and franchises, thus, I am pretty sure is not just helping out the fans to keep up. I will believe when I get the URL that states differently.[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
Player Numbers by Position


[font="courier new"]Cannot find this in[/font] http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules
(NFL Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4)

All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3c (see NOTE 1), and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: quarterbacks, punters, and placekickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned); running backs and defensive backs, 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable); offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman, 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers 50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

NOTES:

5, 3, 3c has to do with the size and placement of the numerals
7, 2, 3 rules regarding notifying the referee of eligibility if wearing and ineligible number for a position. Any player wearing an eligible number at a pass receiving position (running backs, tight ends, and wide receivers) can play any eligible pass receiving position without reporting to the referee. That is, running backs can line up as wide receivers or tight ends, and players wearing wide receiver and/or tight end numbers can line up in the backfield without having to report to the referee.

[font="courier new"]What Official NFL Publication or WebPage (URL) did you find these posted items (Perry's stats* and above)?
*-I could not find any NFL or Chicago Bears' webspages
[/font]

[font="courier new"][/font] 

RE: man in motion

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:57 pm
by JasonninTN
ORIGINAL: Marauders
With all due respect to you, I think you way wrong; I cannot remember a single pass thrown any of there ways.

William Perry - Chicago Bears

....... Rushing ................... Receiving
Year Att Yds Avg Lg TD .... Rec Yds Avg Lg TD
1985 05 07 1.4 02 02 ...... 01 04 4.0 04t 01


Dan Klecko did this for the Patriots prior to the Colts. The Patriots had thrown TD passes to LB Mike Vrabel and used Dan Klecko at fullback.

Dan Klecko - Indianapolis Colts

...................... Receiving Stats
YEAR TEAM REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD FUM LOST
2003 NWE 0 00 0.0 00 0 0 0 0
2004 NWE 3 18 6.0 11 0 1 1 1
2006 IND . 1 02 2.0 02 1 1 0 0
Career ..... 4 20 5.0 11 1 2 1 1

Lastly, since I believe the declaration of eligiability did not happen and referees would not make that mistake, that a declaration of eligiability is not necessary, unless he lines-up on The LOS. It makes complete when you examine it. Non-skill players (especially OLman) next 5-other OLmen are hidden; however, non-skill players lined-up in a position eligiable to catch a pass (at any formation) and regularly catches a pass a game is obvious.

There are two eligibility requirements: the jersey number and the position on the field.

Klecko's number was ineligible, so he was required to report and be declared eligible.

After that, as long as he did not line up on the inside line, he was eligible to catch a pass.


Logic Table

A and B are both necessary conditions.

A=T B=T C=T
A=F B=T C=F
A=T B=F C=F
A=F B=F C=F

A: eligible uniform number
B: eligible position
C: eligible to catch a pass
T: True
F: False


Player Numbers by Position
(NFL Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4)

All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3c (see NOTE 1), and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: quarterbacks, punters, and placekickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned); running backs and defensive backs, 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable); offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman, 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers 50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

NOTES:

5, 3, 3c has to do with the size and placement of the numerals
7, 2, 3 rules regarding notifying the referee of eligibility if wearing and ineligible number for a position. Any player wearing an eligible number at a pass receiving position (running backs, tight ends, and wide receivers) can play any eligible pass receiving position without reporting to the referee. That is, running backs can line up as wide receivers or tight ends, and players wearing wide receiver and/or tight end numbers can line up in the backfield without having to report to the referee.




Thanks Marauders, I knew I saw William Perry catch a pass back in the day.....

RE: man in motion

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:41 pm
by Brockleigh
[font="courier new"]Cannot find this in[/font] http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules

That's only a digest of the rules, and is severely scaled down. By no means should you take what is printed on those pages as the be all and end all of NFL rules.

Just because something doesn't appear in that digest, shouldn't mean the rule doesn't exist. The NFL rulebook I've picked up in the library and Chapters looks like War & Peace. That Digest, when printed out, looks like a pamphlet.