Ineligible Man Downfield

Urbandale2013

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2018
5,723
7,432
113
31
Urbandale
Rewatching the game right now and trying to understand the call on Allen on the first drive. Scates clearly checked in with the official that he was supposed to be off the line. I’ll be honest he looks on the line but my understanding is if they check they are good. Did the official tell him he was on the line and Scates didn’t do anything? Did the official just ignore him?
 
Rewatching the game right now and trying to understand the call on Allen on the first drive. Scates clearly checked in with the official that he was supposed to be off the line. I’ll be honest he looks on the line but my understanding is if they check they are good. Did the official tell him he was on the line and Scates didn’t do anything? Did the official just ignore him?
Yeah Scates covered him up. I'm guessing that was on him
 
It looked on TV like Scates covered him.

Frankly, issues with formation/alignment comes down to coaching more than the players IMO. These guys shouldn't have issues wondering where they should be lined up at to begin with, these basics should be handled in the film room pretty quickly.
 
It looked on TV like Scates covered him.

Frankly, issues with formation/alignment comes down to coaching more than the players IMO. These guys shouldn't have issues wondering where they should be lined up at to begin with, these basics should be handled in the film room pretty quickly.
I just can't imagine that the coaches haven't made it abundantly clear where they are supposed to line up. And if Scates or anyone else were consistently not getting lined up right in practice, I don't think you'd see them on the field so much. Sometimes guys just goof up.

I think last week was a goof by the officials, this week was a goof by our WR. Hopefully we won't see it the rest of the year.
 
Pretty sure Scates has been the WR that has created the formation issues on 2 TDs called back and another long play. I played line and have watched football for 40 years, but it’s always confused me. But a good coach could teach that I’m sure. The issue is the 3 TE packages when they motion. If both WR and the outside TE are on the line the TE is now a lineman. I hope they get it fixed because I want to see Scates out there more.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BigD
Pointing backwards doesn't mean anything if he is lined up on the line, which he was. He needed to move back a step.

It's simply a Scates issue. He was lost/confused many times yesterday on what his assignment was.
So did you just not read the original post? The question is while confirming did Scates not adjust to the official or did the official just not tell Scates he was on the line. It’s clear that Scates was on the line and also that he was trying to be off the line. What caused the problem.
 
Rewatching the game right now and trying to understand the call on Allen on the first drive. Scates clearly checked in with the official that he was supposed to be off the line. I’ll be honest he looks on the line but my understanding is if they check they are good. Did the official tell him he was on the line and Scates didn’t do anything? Did the official just ignore him?


They check to make sure they are "on" the line. Scates probably screwed up on that one.
 
I don’t think the official has any obligation to tell them one way or another, if I remember anything from my officiating classes 15 years ago.
Bingo! I officiated high school football for 30 years. It is not the officials job to tell a player if he is on or off the line of scrimmage. Some officials will reply if a player asks if he is on/off LOS but no obligation to do so.
 
Not sure why this is ever an issue. If the TE is on your off. One receiver on each side is on the line. Math isn't that tough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CY05O
In the Oklahoma game there was a play where Kolar was interfered with in the end zone but they called penalties on both sides saying the 88 (Kolar) was an ineligible receiver. I have watched that play several times and Kosar was clearly lined up off the line of scrimage. How could he be ruled ineligible?

Also in the OU game Kwangwu had along run called back for illegal alignment which I could not identify.
 
In the Oklahoma game there was a play where Kolar was interfered with in the end zone but they called penalties on both sides saying the 88 (Kolar) was an ineligible receiver. I have watched that play several times and Kosar was clearly lined up off the line of scrimage. How could he be ruled ineligible?

Because they meant 89, not 88. The stylized font makes it hard to distinguish.
 
So did you just not read the original post? The question is while confirming did Scates not adjust to the official or did the official just not tell Scates he was on the line. It’s clear that Scates was on the line and also that he was trying to be off the line. What caused the problem.

I'm not sure that it's as clear as "Scates was... trying to be off the line." I re-watched and my interpretation was that he was trying to line up on the line, then asked and received confirmation from the official that he was indeed on the line. The problem was that he was supposed to be back, off the line.

My opinion anyway.
 
It's Scates' fault. If everyone else is lined up correctly, and he's now lined up incorrectly two or three times, how is it anyone else's fault but his? We aren't seeing any other receivers line up incorrectly.

Also, is it really that hard to figure out if you're on the line? The field is really clearly marked. I know things are moving quickly, but it's not rocket science.
 
I'm not sure that it's as clear as "Scates was... trying to be off the line." I re-watched and my interpretation was that he was trying to line up on the line, then asked and received confirmation from the official that he was indeed on the line. The problem was that he was supposed to be back, off the line.

My opinion anyway.
Why the hell would he point backwards if he was trying to check if he was on the line? People seem to have this dumb idea they only check to be on the line. They check both on and off the line.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron