At what point is the offense considered “set” after which any movement prior to the snap means a false start penalty? You see it a lot in college, but also in the NFL - the line is set and the quaterback takes position, but then stands up and looks to the sideline. Often the O Linemen stand up and move around as well.
I remember way back in the 70’s that the Dallas Cowboys O line would take their three point stances, then as a group they would stand up and get back in their stances.
So what is the point in time where you can’t move any more?
Depends what the motion is. If it’s something that the referee thinks is designed to deceive the defense and/or induce an offside, for instance, it’s a false start. If it’s a shift or a motion then there are different rules in effect - players have to reset after the shift and establish a still position for I think a full second before the snap. One player can be in motion at the snap, though.
Edited to add: to answer more directly, there is no “point of no return,” except that they have to do so before the snap.
I have another rules question I’m going to tack onto this thread. I was watching a college football game yesterday and there was a play where the defense jumped offsides, but did not make contact. The center snapped the ball and the offense ran a play. This is typically considered a ‘free play’ because if it goes wrong they accept the penalty and repeat the down, but if it is successful, they may be better off with the results of the play. On this particular play, however, there was an offsetting offensive penalty during the play (something like holding or illegal block).
My question is: does the off-setting penalty negate the ‘free play’ effect? If there had been an interception would it have gone to the defense?
A ball that hits any part of the field goal posts is a dead ball whether on a kick or a pass (a field goal that hits a post or crossbar and goes through is still a field goal though). I’m not sure if this was also the case when the posts used to be positioned at the front of the end zone or not…
Hence, a ball sitting on the crossbar has crossed the plane.
For the most part, you can’t cite to the NFL rulebook, because as you note they inexplicably don’t make it easily available. There’s a link to a .pdf version of the 2006 Official Rulebook here, but I can’t get it to load at the moment.
I don’t think my original question has been answered. A guy who blows the snapcount and flinches isn’t trying to deceive or induce the defense to jump, he just messed up. Sometimes the defense will just point at the guy who flinched in order to get the call. I don’t think that would work when the QB and tight end stand up and look to the sideline. There is something fundamentally different between the two examples, but I don’t know what it is.
I don’t think so. I’ve seen a few instances where a ball hit the inner part of one of the uprights, bounced sideways and then hit the other upright, and then bounced back into the filed of play. This means that at least a part of the ball crossed the plane, however these are always ruled “no good”.
While the balancing on the crossbar example is very unlikely, I think a more likely scenario (albeit still not probable) would be if the ball, lands exactly at the point where the crossbar meats the upright, and becomes wedged in. I’d guess that this is still no good.
Interesting. In the NCAA, the ball must pass over the crossbar between the uprights. “The crossbar and uprights are treated as a line, not a plane, in determining
forward progress of the ball.”
In other words, the whole ball must pass through the uprights, not just break the plane.
I’m almost positive that the entire ball must be within the goalposts, but I’m off to verify. I think it’s treated as if the goalposts extend infinitely upward.
Huh? I do know. What is with the attitude, anyway?
The thing that’s fundamentally different is that standing up and looking to the sideline isn’t likely to induce the defense into being fooled about the beginning of the play. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a question of intent, so I shouldn’t have said “designed.”
It’s really a question of the practical effect of the movement by the offense. Think about it literally - it’s not a “false” “start” if the quarterback turns and looks at the sideline, right? Unless the quarterback is under center and perfectly still, and it’s 4th and 1, and the quarterback really quickly springs up out of his crouch or something, in which case that is a false start.
Anyway, since I have to link to something or somebody’s going to get all condescending and snotty, here you go:
Does that clear it up a little? So in the case of an offensive tackle who jumps off the ball and backs into pass protection before the ball is snapped, that’s a movement that would lead the defense to believe the snap has started.
