Illegal Formation Penalty

[JFreak]

During the OU game I believe we had an illegal formation penalty that resulted in a 5-yd penalty and loss of down. I don't recall ever seeing the loss of down before and can't find it anywhere in the NCAA rule book. Am I off my rocker?

 

[kptvol1]

I was wondering about the loss of down too. I thought it was an error on tv, but they definitely made it 2nd and 15.

 

[Sarms58]

During the OU game I believe we had an illegal formation penalty that resulted in a 5-yd penalty and loss of down. I don't recall ever seeing the loss of down before and can't find it anywhere in the NCAA rule book. Am I off my rocker?

The loss of down penalty was for illegal touching…the TE was covered by the WR but went down field and caught the pass…it’s weird that it’s a loss of down penalty.

Edit: The play by play actually says it was “illegal forward pass” but it was because the TE was an ineligible receiver

 

[WillisWG]

No play, should not been a loss of down.

 

[wmcovol]

I believe it was actually “illegal touching” since the ineligible man caught the ball. It was a result of the WR being lined up on the LOS instead off 1 yard.

Why NCAA doesn’t go to the pro rule here is stupid. Any player on offense with a 50, 60 or 70 number must check in as “eligible”. Otherwise anyone is eligible. It would make officiating easier which they desperately need to do

 

[LAVol1]

I believe it was actually “illegal touching” since the ineligible man caught the ball. It was a result of the WR being lined up on the LOS instead off 1 yard.

Why NCAA doesn’t go to the pro rule here is stupid. Any player on offense with a 50, 60 or 70 number must check in as “eligible”. Otherwise anyone is eligible. It would make officiating easier which they desperately need to do

It's my understanding that pros can't cover the TE with a WR either. A player with a 50, 60 or 70 must report as eligible but still can't be covered by a WR if they go downfield or catch a pass.

 

[KTrain]

Yep, must be harsh penalty to keep ppl from trying to get away with it.

 

[Sarms58]

View attachment 680195

No play, not a loss of down.

But it was a loss of down…that was the second down play, we were penalized 5 yards and the next play was third down. Weird.

 

[Sarms58]

I got flagged for illegal touching at a wedding but it worked out ok…

 

[Sarms58]

Yep, must be harsh penalty to keep ppl from trying to get away with it.
View attachment 680203

Yea, the loss of down on an intentional grounding call makes sense…the illegal touching should be treated as an incomplete pass…JMO

 

[508mikey]

Tough day for Beldar Cornbread

Tough day for Beldar Cornbread

247sports.com

 

[WillisWG]

But it was a loss of down…that was the second down play, we were penalized 5 yards and the next play was third down. Weird.

Yep went back to view and he did call it a loss of down, that is strange

 

[OrangeVolMan]

The loss of down penalty was for illegal touching…the TE was covered by the WR but went down field and caught the pass…it’s weird that it’s a loss of down penalty.

Edit: The play by play actually says it was “illegal forward pass” but it was because the TE was an ineligible receiver

He was behind the line of scrimmage when he caught the ball. Not sure that changes the penalty but he was wasn’t across the line.

 

[508mikey]

He was behind the line of scrimmage when he caught the ball. Not sure that changes the penalty but he was wasn’t across the line.

It wasnt a penalty - that ref was flag happy all night

 

[kckempf]

He was behind the line of scrimmage when he caught the ball. Not sure that changes the penalty but he was wasn’t across the line.

That only affects illegal man downfield penalties. Illegal touching is when an ineligible receiver catches the ball.

 

[Sarms58]

It wasnt a penalty - that ref was flag happy all night

He was an ineligible receiver

 

[Special Ed]

Illegal touching?
Sounds like my first date.
(Fortunately, I wasn't penalized)