Patriots' "eligible Tackle" maneuver

[Scooch]

Pretty good at reading. I take two points: 1) Harbaugh said the official said they would give them time to adjust next time. Yes, taking Harbaugh's word for it, but he's just making that up? Doubtful. 2) You or someone else on this thread made the point: the ref told the Ravens who not cover. What? Why on earth would they do that? The obvious implication is the referee felt there was something unfair about it. What other explanation is there? If it WASN'T unfair, and I was a Patriots fan, I would be absolutely furious that the referee was helping my opponent with defensive strategy. There is a distinct difference between reporting in, joining the huddle, the ref announces an eligible player that player lines up on the end of line, and away we go, vs. a no-huddle attack lining up and a WR telling the ref he's ineligible a second or two before the ball is snapped.

Please, read this:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/1/...-trick-play-that-got-john-harbaugh-mad-ravens

All your answers are there.

I'll wait.

 

[Scooch]

The refs HAVE to tell the defense who is ineligible and that he shouldn't be covered.

Oy.

 

[WalnutPark]

Why is it when Chip Kelly did this with the Eagles in his first game as a NFL coached no one complained, people just said how smart and innovative he was... How Chip Kelly kept the Redskins off-balance

 

[gocraz4dasu]

I hate the Patriots but nobody should be angry about this. It was announced to the stadium. Harbaugh needs to get over the fact he was simply outsmarted.

 

[upperdeck]

Did he break the rule...no. Is it in the spirit of the rule...no.

It's low class but not against the rules. They will now have to change the rule next year.

actually it is clearly against the rules of deception. you are supposed to announce who the inelgible player is a soon as the enter the huddle.

 

[upperdeck]

the main issue is they only used 4 line man.. this is different than using unbalanced lines and extra ineligible guys or guys using ineligible numbers lining up eligible.

 

[Scooch]

actually it is clearly against the rules of deception. you are supposed to announce who the inelgible player is a soon as the enter the huddle.

They did.

 

[donniesyracuse]

the main issue is they only used 4 line man.. this is different than using unbalanced lines and extra ineligible guys or guys using ineligible numbers lining up eligible.

there were seven men on the line just like every other play.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think it's brilliant and everybody should be using this strategy and similar formations.

 

[AZOrange]

The NFL rules are pretty simple.

1. You must have a minimum of 7 players on the LOS for each play.
2. Only the two "end" players are eligible receivers.
3. Since there are 7 players on the LOS, there are only 4 other players to account for, and one of those is Brady.

The rule hasn't changed in 80 years.

Yeah this isn't that difficult.

 

[donniesyracuse]

I think it's brilliant and everybody should be using this strategy and similar formations.

I am hoping the Cowboys try it today. It will be interesting to see if defenses are ready.

 

[Scooch]

I think it's brilliant and everybody should be using this strategy and similar formations.

I think it's awesome that coaches insist that they must devote 18 hours a day to preparation... and then screw up things like counting to 7.

 

[Orangeman]

I found the language I was looking for…

Rule 5 Players, Substitutes, Equipment, General Rules
Section 3 Changes in Position
REPORTING CHANGE OF POSITION
Article 1 An offensive player wearing the number of an ineligible pass receiver (50-79 and 90-99) is permitted to line up in the position of an eligible pass receiver (1-49 and 80-89), and an offensive player wearing the number of an eligible pass receiver is permitted to line up in the position of an ineligible pass receiver, provided that he immediately reports the change in his eligibility status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team.

He must participate in such eligible or ineligible position as long as he is continuously in the game, but prior to each play he must again report his status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team. The game clock shall not be stopped, and the ball shall not be put in play until the Referee takes his normal position.


This is not just about the one play, which is perfectly legal on a stand-alone basis. It's about the entire series of plays.

IF Manatee and/or Vereen changed their eligibility during the series without substituting that is a violation. I thought that is what happened, and what the announcers were flagging for our attention. I don't know if they above description is the official rulebook, or college or pro or whatever, but I thought that a player who was out there could not just change his eligibility on the fly if he was already in the game, which it seemed that Vereen did.

Was Vereen on the field the whole time, or did he sub on for that play? If he subbed, he would have had to report immediately and the Ravens would have had time to adjust due to the substitution. It looked as though Vereen reported to the official on the way over to his position on a no-huddle situation, which would not be immediate and would also be a change in his eligibility which is illegal (assuming I've got the right rules up there).

IF the Patriots declared properly and the Ravens were given time to understand the changes from the beginning of the series or the player's continuous participation in the game, then the Ravens just got outsmarted which is perfectly legal.

IF, as I thought happened, Vereen was in the game on the series, played as an eligible on one play, and then switched (or even, on a single play, reported late which looked like happened on the completion to Manatee) then the plays should be disallowed.

The rules are pretty clear that you're not supposed to be allowed to accomplish this type of confusion against an "aware" opponent.

So it's not just about whether that play was a legal alignment, it's whether the substitutions and reporting were done properly and in a manner that allowed the Defense to adjust. Yes, that involves time as an element.

Was Vereen ineligible the whole series (or the whole time he was in there continuously?)?

If this is the wrong rulebook, then I'm a doofus but this was my immediate thought process about it.

I'll continue to differentiate this from the standard unbalanced formations…but at the same time if Vereen subbed in and declared ineligible in a timely manner on all three plays then I'm wrong.

 

[Scooch]

Stop. You've been told a half dozen times why it was perfectly legal.

There is nothing in that rule you posted that makes this not so.

 

[dasher]

Not about feeling pity for the Ravens. Has nothing to do with the Ravens. it has to do with what Belichick did. And the league will step in and stop this in the offseason. Even the Ref's said after the game they were confused and never seen this before. If it happens in college so be it, on the NFL level that is not the "spirit of the rule" and it will stop

there is no such thing as the spirit of the rule. Either it is legal or it isn't. This is professional football not some sowing circle.

 

[Scooch]

Why is it when Chip Kelly did this with the Eagles in his first game as a NFL coached no one complained, people just said how smart and innovative he was... How Chip Kelly kept the Redskins off-balance

Apparently Harbaugh never saw that. Which means "no one" has ever seen it. And the flag happy NFL referees chose to just let it go, which we know is always their M.O. when they see something strange. It definitely wasn't that they knew it was legal.

 

[samspann1]

The Pats are resorting to gimmick plays (Edelman TD pass) and smoke and mirrors to beat the Ravens at home?

 

[Alsacs]

I found the language I was looking for…

Rule 5 Players, Substitutes, Equipment, General Rules
Section 3 Changes in Position
REPORTING CHANGE OF POSITION
Article 1 An offensive player wearing the number of an ineligible pass receiver (50-79 and 90-99) is permitted to line up in the position of an eligible pass receiver (1-49 and 80-89), and an offensive player wearing the number of an eligible pass receiver is permitted to line up in the position of an ineligible pass receiver, provided that he immediately reports the change in his eligibility status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team.

He must participate in such eligible or ineligible position as long as he is continuously in the game, but prior to each play he must again report his status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team. The game clock shall not be stopped, and the ball shall not be put in play until the Referee takes his normal position.


This is not just about the one play, which is perfectly legal on a stand-alone basis. It's about the entire series of plays.

IF Manatee and/or Vereen changed their eligibility during the series without substituting that is a violation. I thought that is what happened, and what the announcers were flagging for our attention. I don't know if they above description is the official rulebook, or college or pro or whatever, but I thought that a player who was out there could not just change his eligibility on the fly if he was already in the game, which it seemed that Vereen did.

Was Vereen on the field the whole time, or did he sub on for that play? If he subbed, he would have had to report immediately and the Ravens would have had time to adjust due to the substitution. It looked as though Vereen reported to the official on the way over to his position on a no-huddle situation, which would not be immediate and would also be a change in his eligibility which is illegal (assuming I've got the right rules up there).

IF the Patriots declared properly and the Ravens were given time to understand the changes from the beginning of the series or the player's continuous participation in the game, then the Ravens just got outsmarted which is perfectly legal.

IF, as I thought happened, Vereen was in the game on the series, played as an eligible on one play, and then switched (or even, on a single play, reported late which looked like happened on the completion to Manatee) then the plays should be disallowed.

The rules are pretty clear that you're not supposed to be allowed to accomplish this type of confusion against an "aware" opponent.

So it's not just about whether that play was a legal alignment, it's whether the substitutions and reporting were done properly and in a manner that allowed the Defense to adjust. Yes, that involves time as an element.

Was Vereen ineligible the whole series (or the whole time he was in there continuously?)?

If this is the wrong rulebook, then I'm a doofus but this was my immediate thought process about it.

I'll continue to differentiate this from the standard unbalanced formations…but at the same time if Vereen subbed in and declared ineligible in a timely manner on all three plays then I'm wrong.

http://deadspin.com/the-patriots-annoyed-john-harbaugh-by-having-fun-with-e-1678818453

It was legal, it was announced on the mic at the stadium. Harbaugh is complaining because he got confused. It is BS he can't just admit the Pats got him.

 

[Alsacs]

The Pats are resorting to gimmick plays (Edelman TD pass) and smoke and mirrors to beat the Ravens at home?

Ravens are a bad matchup for NE. The Pats have the horses to beat Denver and Indy.
Seattle/GB/Dallas all would be tough in the Super Bowl.

 

[Orangeman]

I found the relevant passage out of the NFL rule book. It confirms that a player may not change his eligibility during the course of a drive. That means that if either Manatee or Vereen switched from eligible to ineligible during the drive, that play would have been illegal. I am now more convinced than ever that there is a chance this was an illegal maneuver. I have copied the play-by-play from this drive off of ESPN.com below. It clearly shows two things -- Shane Vereen was the target of an incomplete pass on the first play of the drive and then was reported as ineligible on a later play in the drive (7 plays later).

What I still don't know are a couple things: 1) did Vereen substitute out before reporting as ineligible? That would seem to make the plays legal if he subbed back in and reported immediately to the refs who then subsequently gave the Ravens time to adjust their defense. Don't know if that happened, didn't tape the game and don't have a source that details player participation on each play; 2) Did Vereen switch back to an eligible player on the plays after the Ravens were burned? There were two plays, an incompletion and a TD pass, Vereen would have had to leave the game if they subbed back in a 5th lineman and he would have been an eligible player as a back or a receiver. That would have been a violation.

I don't care what the NFL released, they have zero credibility with me and they have every incentive to deaden a threat to their rigged system.

I also don't care if Patriots fans want to insult my reading comprehension or whatever, this is just a sports forum and I don't take offense.

Final comment: None of the written reports I've seen thus far, whether from Deadspin or ESPN or whatever, showing the formation, have addressed or answered these key questions: 1) Did the Patriots alter the eligibility of players on the fly, and 2) did the officials give the Ravens adequate time to adjust after Vereen "reported" on the way over to his position as a Wide Receiver…the rules clearly state that the ineligible player is required to report "immediately", i.e. before any huddle takes place. If there is no huddle, how to address this variable is certainly something the competition committee will be reviewing in the off-season.

The first is rule-bending/trickery and a penalty on the Patriots. The second is incompetent officiating, both of which are entirely possible, based on established history.

Just to be clear, it is impossible to look at that one play and determine whether this play was legal. I hope this is crystal clear. That said, I cannot without more information make a final declaration of guilt or incompetence.

Just having fun on a Sunday and keeping 'em honest.


J.Tucker kicks 65 yards from BLT 35 to end zone, Touchback. 28 14
1st and 10 at NE 20 (10:22) T.Brady pass incomplete short middle to S.Vereen.
2nd and 10 at NE 20 (10:15) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to B.LaFell to NE 31 for 11 yards (R.Melvin).
1st and 10 at NE 31 (9:33) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short middle to M.Hoomanawanui to NE 47 for 16 yards (D.Stewart).
1st and 10 at NE 47 (8:48) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to R.Gronkowski to BLT 44 for 9 yards (R.Melvin).
2nd and 1 at BAL 44 (8:24) T.Brady up the middle to BLT 40 for 4 yards. PENALTY on BLT, Defensive 12 On-field, 5 yards, enforced at BLT 44 - No Play.
1st and 10 at BAL 39 (8:23) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to J.Edelman to BLT 28 for 11 yards (W.Hill).
1st and 10 at BAL 28 (8:23) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to J.Edelman to BLT 24 for 4 yards (C.Mosley).
2nd and 6 at BAL 24 (7:19) NE 34-Vereen ineligible. (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short middle to M.Hoomanawanui to BLT 10 for 14 yards (D.Stewart). PENALTY on BLT, Unsportsmanlike Conduct, 5 yards, enforced at BLT 10. Penalty on BLT bench.
1st and 5 at BAL 5 (6:57) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short left to J.Edelman.
2nd and 5 at BAL 5 (6:52) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to R.Gronkowski for 5 yards, TOUCHDOWN. NE 12-Brady 45th career postseason pass TD, ties Joe Montana for most all-time. NE 87-Gronkowski 2nd career postseason 100-yard game.S.Gostkowski extra point is GOOD, Center-D.Aiken, Holder-R.Allen. 28 21
NE DRIVE TOTALS: 9 plays, 80 yards, 3:34




Section 3 Changes in Position

REPORTING CHANGE OF POSITION

Article 1An offensive player wearing the number of an ineligible pass receiver (50-79 and 90-99) is permitted

to line up in the position of an eligible pass receiver (1-49 and 80-89), and an offensive player wearing the

number of an eligible pass receiver is permitted to line up in the position of an ineligible pass receiver,

provided that he immediately reports the change in his eligibility status to the Referee, who will inform the

defensive team.

He must participate in such eligible or ineligible position as long as he is continuously in the game, but prior to

each play he must again report his status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team. The game

clock shall not be stopped, and the ball shall not be put in play until the Referee takes his normal position.

RETURNING TO ORIGINAL POSITION

Article 2A player who has reported a change in his eligibility status to the Referee is permitted to return to a

position indicated by the eligibility status of his number after:

(a) a team timeout;

(b) the end of a quarter;

(c) the two-minute warning;

(d) a foul;

(e) a replay challenge;

(f) a touchdown;

(g) a completed kick from scrimmage;

(h) a change of possession; or

(i) if the player has been withdrawn for one legal snap. A player withdrawn for one legal snap may reenter

at a position indicated by the eligibility status of his number, unless he again reports to the

Referee that he is assuming a position other than that designated by the eligibility status of his

number.

OFFICIAL

 

[Scooch]

Every officiating "expert" in the media has said it was legal.

Not just the NFL.

But keep tilting at that windmill, Don Quixote.

 

[upperdeck]

hey they totally changed the way players have to report to the huddle because of deception issues.. this is no different, clearly meant to confuse the other team which is what the rules are designed to stop.. it wont be allowed next year.

 

[upperdeck]

Every officiating "expert" in the media has said it was legal.

Not just the NFL.

But keep tilting at that windmill, Don Quixote.

it wasnt legal for several reasons. not having 5 eligible lineman is not legal either.

 

[Orangeman]

Every officiating "expert" in the media has said it was legal.

Not just the NFL.

But keep tilting at that windmill, Don Quixote.

That doesn't faze me in the least. They could all be wrong. Do you legit believe every single thing the Media reports?

There's one very simple way to look at this…IF Vereen stayed in the game the next play, as a RB, that would be a violation of the rules.

Would love to see a screen shot of the next two plays for the formation to see where Vereen was...

 

[Alsacs]

it wasnt legal for several reasons. not having 5 eligible lineman is not legal either.

Vereen was the 5th lineman and it was announced over the PA that he was ineligible. Lineman don't have to lineup on the LOS they can be split wide. It was legal and Harbaugh's defense was confused.