Illegal Formation Penalty

[casual-observer]

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

Made me laugh. When they called this play during the game on Saturday my wife looked over and wrinkled her nose. She said "surely they could come up with a better phrase than that?!?!"

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

True…they could save sack/penalty yardage loss..treating it as an incomplete pass still means hey lose the down. Maybe if it weren’t loss of down and yardage we would see it happen intentionally as you say. But we only see it now as a result of a formation issue where an inside receiver gets covered up by an outside receiver. I’d favor either a 5 yard penalty and replay the down or just make it an incomplete pass. just my opinion

It’s like our fainting linemen after extra points and opponents’ defenders falling to the turf to slow down our pace. The rules are going to be exploited.

If there was a way to separate throwing to ineligible lineman and to a covered up receiver then they could eliminate the loss of down. It used to be easy when jerseys 50-79 were always ineligible. The loss of down is harsh, but it might be better than taking away sack opportunities.

 

[TrueOrange]

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

Thus the loss of down. The purpose of the phrase is essentially “despite the penalty during play, the down is not replayed”.

 

[Sarms58]

Thus the loss of down. The purpose of the phrase is essentially “despite the penalty during play, the down is not replayed”.

Yea, with the yardage…maybe if college used jersey numbers like the NFL it would only be a yardage penalty if the ball is caught by someone with an ineligible jersey number…

 

[37620VOL]

Without the rule then QBs could avoid intentional grounding (and the loss of down) by throwing to a lineman.

Nope, to avoid intentional grounding there has to be an eligible receiver in the area, it has nothing to do with illegal touching.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Nope, to avoid intentional grounding there has to be an eligible receiver in the area, it has nothing to do with illegal touching.

Loss of down in both cases. By not having a loss of down when covered receivers touch the ball, QBs could also avoid a loss of down by intentionally throwing to an ineligible receiver instead of intentionally grounding the ball. The rule would be exploited if covered receivers touching wasn’t a loss of down.