SetHut
Junior Member
Posts: 316
|
Post by SetHut on Nov 5, 2008 13:55:02 GMT -6
A football official told me the A-11 is illegal in WV because of the intent to gain an advantage through disception. I'm relieve that we won't have to try to defend it.
|
|
bigcroz
Junior Member
Go STAGS!!
Posts: 356
|
Post by bigcroz on Nov 5, 2008 14:18:08 GMT -6
First off I am not a fan of the A 11 however under the reasoning you just stated all teams that run the wing T and layer the ball would no longer be able to do so, as they are trying to gain an advantage through deception.
No more reverses, counters, double passes, hook and ladders, hard counts by the QB, all of these things are attempting to gain an advantage through deception!!
Not for the A 11 but someone will have to come up with better wording than "trying to gain an advantage through deception"
Just my $.02
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Nov 5, 2008 14:23:14 GMT -6
I think the rule is leaning more towards deception as in lining up in a kick formation and not kicking it. I don't think they mean deception as in what goes on during the play. Its more about the formation, intent of the rules allowing the formation, and how it is being used as a way to gain an advantage by working around a rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Nov 5, 2008 14:32:16 GMT -6
so this means the 8 yd shotgun is illegal then to. It is the short punt formation. you might or might not punt.
I would run the A 11 offense just to see how they would handle it in WV. If they go by fed rules it would be an interesting lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Nov 5, 2008 14:32:48 GMT -6
First off I am not a fan of the A 11 however under the reasoning you just stated all teams that run the wing T and layer the ball would no longer be able to do so, as they are trying to gain an advantage through deception. No more reverses, counters, double passes, hook and ladders, hard counts by the QB, all of these things are attempting to gain an advantage through deception!! Not for the A 11 but someone will have to come up with better wording than "trying to gain an advantage through deception" Just my $.02 How about "gaining an advantage through deception that isn't in keeping with the spirit of the game by taking advantage of a rule or rules of the game not meant to facilitate advancement of the football by the offense"? |
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Nov 5, 2008 14:39:38 GMT -6
I think the rule is leaning more towards deception as in lining up in a kick formation and not kicking it. I don't think they mean deception as in what goes on during the play. Its more about the formation, intent of the rules allowing the formation, and how it is being used as a way to gain an advantage by working around a rule. I'm not well versed in the A11, but doesn't it also take advantage of the player number rules regarding eligible receivers? Such that a quick shift can suddenly make any player eligible. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Nov 5, 2008 16:04:48 GMT -6
I now know how George Clooney's character in Leather Heads felt when he found out the pink in the polk or the crusty bob was no longer legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Nov 5, 2008 16:13:22 GMT -6
Leather heads, worst movie Ive seen in 20 years, just awful .
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Nov 5, 2008 18:21:22 GMT -6
Leather heads, worst movie Ive seen in 20 years, just awful . it was really bad. I expected more. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Nov 5, 2008 19:42:59 GMT -6
so this means the 8 yd shotgun is illegal then to. It is the short punt formation. you might or might not punt. I would run the A 11 offense just to see how they would handle it in WV. If they go by fed rules it would be an interesting lawsuit. The part that;s deceptive is that everyone has an eligible number. Has nothing to do with the 8 yard snap or deception after the snap. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Nov 5, 2008 20:24:57 GMT -6
Its the officials job to enforce the rules, not interpret them.. or atleast they say something like that.. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2008 22:10:29 GMT -6
i dont really see it as deception on the same level as the wing-t, trick plays, etc. there is a rule in place to allow the defense to figure out who's eligible or not, the scrimmage kick seems like just a way to circumvent that rule by using a "loophole". there's no role that says you can't fake a handoff to a player, or similar that is designed to prevent deception in that form.
anyway, i dont think states should be outright banning it - some good creative ideas in there, however they could close the loophole, like NCAA rules do. in that case i believe it would be only legal in certain situations - obvious punting downs. in addition the other concepts/deception after the snap would still be fair game for defenses to defend against - its just the eligible/ineligible thing that gets me, as there are rules in place at every level to ensure quick identification of eligible receivers (the 50-69 ineligible, the reporting of ineligible players as eliglble before the play).
|
|
billyn
Sophomore Member
Posts: 231
|
Post by billyn on Nov 5, 2008 22:17:12 GMT -6
I was told by an official before a ball game that the federation is discussing the offense right now, and that the college rules regarding kick formation numbering will be adopted next year.
|
|
billyn
Sophomore Member
Posts: 231
|
Post by billyn on Nov 5, 2008 22:18:13 GMT -6
I
|
|
htownoc
Sophomore Member
GATA
Posts: 186
|
Post by htownoc on Nov 6, 2008 6:40:52 GMT -6
We ran an A-11 type formation this year in WV.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----15--1--82-------------------------------------61-51-53----------------------------------33--2--22---------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------6----17--------------------------------------------------------
In week one we explained to the crew how the formation was legal. We ran it with success. The officials threw some flags, but always discussed the penalty before assessing it or waiving it off.
In week two, we didn't get to practice the formation, so we didn't run it.
In week three, the officials told me before the game that WV had "outlawed" the A-11 and that it is a deceptive act to take advantage of the number exception in the scrimmage kick rule. It is deceptive because it disguises who the eligible receivers are to the defense.
I have no problem with WV "outlawing" it, I just wish I would have been notified so I didn't spend practice time working a formation that I wasn't going to be able to run.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 6, 2008 7:34:23 GMT -6
This is great news...hopefully, other states will follow!
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Nov 6, 2008 7:59:15 GMT -6
Abusing the numbering exception is the only way A-11 is illegal. You can line up any way you want as long as you have 7 on the line and 5 with numbers 50-79. If someone is in scrimmage kick formation with a snap receiver 7 yards deep then you can have all eligible numbers. That is what some states have deemed illegal, abusing the numbering exception.
It is not an exception if you do it every down. The spirit of the rule was to change eligibility rules on a scrimmage kick.
|
|
|
|
Post by theprez98 on Nov 6, 2008 12:31:57 GMT -6
Telling teams that they won't be able to use the exception next year is fine, but making a rules change in-season, IMHO, is wrong. Especially when teams have invested a lot of time and effort into installing the system.
|
|
