Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Rules Question/Ineligible Wide Receivers
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 3
| visibility 1

Rules Question/Ineligible Wide Receivers


Oct 17, 2022, 9:38 PM
IMG_6097.jpg(184.8 K)
IMG_6098.jpg(139.3 K)
IMG_6099.jpg(134.0 K)

Noticed this on a few offensive plays rewatching Saturday's game. From my understanding of the rules, only the outermost receiver on the line of scrimmage is an eligible receiver. I know there's typically some leeway on who is on the line, but in the three images the field side receivers must both be considered on the line of scrimmage or it would be an illegal formation with 5 in the backfield.

Anyways, the inner man was never thrown to but it seems like an odd formation if my understanding of the rules is correct.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Rules Question/Ineligible Wide Receivers


Oct 17, 2022, 9:58 PM

Edit: If this is correct, it should have been a penalty for having the inside receiver more than 3 yards downfield.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Rules Question/Ineligible Wide Receivers


Oct 17, 2022, 10:17 PM

Could the play have been a bubble screen or run- sweep?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Rules Question/Ineligible Wide Receivers


Oct 17, 2022, 10:34 PM

One was a run but the first two were downfield passes. Around 4:20 left in the 3rd I believe and 9:40 in the second.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 3
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic