Penalty

#1
OWB

OWB

Never
Staff member
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
47,161
Likes
834
#1
In the SECCG, we were penalized because our TE was down the field. Can anyone explain to me what that was about? Did I miss something there? I saw the replay of the game and it still made no sense to me.
 
#2
#2
It was called on Albert! He was like at the 5 yard line on a boot leg pass play :question:
 
#3
#3
Nope that wasn't the one. There were 2 illegal man down field calls. The one that I was talking about was on number 87 Justin Reed.
 
#5
#5
Covered? So why does that make him an illegal man down field?
 
#7
#7
By being covered, he in effect becomes a lineman, no longer eligible. What they were saying during the game was that a receiver probably was on the line effectively covering the TE. In this case, I believe the TE must be back off the line to be eligible (not sure of the specifics here but I think this is the gist of it)


 
#8
#8
By being covered, he in effect becomes a lineman, no longer eligible. What they were saying during the game was that a receiver probably was on the line effectively covering the TE. In this case, I believe the TE must be back off the line to be eligible (not sure of the specifics here but I think this is the gist of it)
Click to expand...


Right, kinda, if the TE wants to an eligible receiver, the wide receiver must be OFF the line. In this case the receiver was on the line, making the TE ineligible.
 
#9
#9
Originally posted by lang wiseman fan@Dec 7, 2004 10:39 PM
By being covered, he in effect becomes a lineman, no longer eligible. What they were saying during the game was that a receiver probably was on the line effectively covering the TE. In this case, I believe the TE must be back off the line to be eligible (not sure of the specifics here but I think this is the gist of it)
Click to expand...


Right, kinda, if the TE wants to an eligible receiver, the wide receiver must be OFF the line. In this case the receiver was on the line, making the TE ineligible.
Click to expand...

That's what I was trying to say :p

Are you covered by the next closest guy or anybody out from you. E.g. if TE was on the line and the next WR on the same side was off the line yet there was another WR after that on the same side who was on the line, is the TE still covered?
 
#11
#11
if the TE has a wide receiver that is on the line, then the TE is ineligible. I'm kinda confused with your question. You may line up receivers outside of the TE and have them eligible as long as they are in the backfield. You must have 7 guys on the line when the ball is snapped. If you want your TE eligible, the WR must line up off the line. I hope that helps.
 
#12
#12
Lang wise man,

What I'm suggesting is having 2 WR's lined up outside the TE. If the one closest to the TE is off the line while the outside receiver is on the line. Does that still count as being covered?

In other words the TE and outside receiver are on the line, the inside receiver is off the line (leaving the TE uncovered relative to the inside receiver)

So is the issue of "covering" related directly to the adjacent player (inside receiver) or any player on the side of the TE (e.g. outside receiver)

If this doesn't make sense, don't worry about it - no big deal.
 
#13
#13
An END is the END of offensive players on the LOS. Whether its a SPLIT END, TIGHT END or a TACKLE.

Actually, a TACKLE cannot line up at END (He has to be covered).
 
#14
#14
Originally posted by lang wiseman fan@Dec 7, 2004 11:13 PM
if the TE has a wide receiver that is on the line, then the TE is ineligible. I'm kinda confused with your question. You may line up receivers outside of the TE and have them eligible as long as they are in the backfield. You must have 7 guys on the line when the ball is snapped. If you want your TE eligible, the WR must line up off the line. I hope that helps.
Click to expand...

Actually, the TE could back off the line himself aka "be in the backfield" and become elligible. It's all a complicated rule that was put in for reasons I don't understand. I don't think many do these days, I've seen more proceedure calls for not enough men on the line in the past two years to choke a horse. I've never seen a TE declared inelligible b/c he was covered though.
 
#15
#15
Originally posted by _volfan_@Dec 7, 2004 8:33 PM
An END is the END of offensive players on the LOS. Whether its a SPLIT END, TIGHT END or a TACKLE.

Actually, a TACKLE cannot line up at END (He has to be covered).
Click to expand...

For split end formations, I came up with the patented shampoo defensive scheme.

that was milo's corny joke of the night.
 
#18
#18
:blink: Huh? Did someone say turducken? Well thanks for tying to explain that call guys. It would be a lot easier though if they just didn't call it.
 
#22
#22
On the play where Albert drifted downfield. Can someone explain the finer points of the rule. It looked to me that he drifted downfield after the quarterback released the ball. When is a lineman allowed to go on downfield to block on a passing play?
 
#23
#23
what about the pass interference call right before the 2nd to last auburn touchdown? now, that was a bad call.
 
#24
#24
Originally posted by allvol@Dec 8, 2004 9:46 AM
On the play where Albert drifted downfield. Can someone explain the finer points of the rule. It looked to me that he drifted downfield after the quarterback released the ball. When is a lineman allowed to go on downfield to block on a passing play?
Click to expand...

I think the rule is that a lineman cannot go more than 5 yards downfield until the ball is thrown. The linemen can go anywhere they want on a running play, but once the ball is thrown, they are ineligible if they are more than 5 yards downfield UNLESS they are the last man on the line of scrimmage (and therefore an eligible receiver) OR they report to the referee as being an eligible receiver.
 
#25
#25
Originally posted by GAVol+Dec 8, 2004 10:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (GAVol @ Dec 8, 2004 10:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-allvol@Dec 8, 2004 9:46 AM
On the play where Albert drifted downfield.  Can someone explain the finer points of the rule.  It looked to me that he drifted downfield after the quarterback released the ball.  When is a lineman allowed to go on downfield to block on a passing play?
Click to expand...

I think the rule is that a lineman cannot go more than 5 yards downfield until the ball is thrown. The linemen can go anywhere they want on a running play, but once the ball is thrown, they are ineligible if they are more than 5 yards downfield UNLESS they are the last man on the line of scrimmage (and therefore an eligible receiver) OR they report to the referee as being an eligible receiver. [/quote]
If that is the case, then I think that the officials made a bad call their too. He was well within 5 yards when the ball left Clausen&#39;s hand and then he drifted past the &#39;5 yards&#39; towards the goal line. Nevertheless, the Vols scored on the next play.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top