isn't there a rule the OL must all line up roughly parallel to the centers helmet?

[youngestson]

Yea the Refs missed that call. I think both teams lined up with the tackles way back during obvious passing downs.

During this game, the officials seemed inclined to let both us and the Giants just play and held the flags as much as possible.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

This has been a trend in the league for the last few years on passing downs.

My guess is that this is going to be one of those things that the competition committee cracks down on in a year or two.

[Dan T.]

Holy crap. The right tackle is lined up further back than the guy flanked to the right!!!

[Dan T.]

This has been a trend in the league for the last few years on passing downs.

My guess is that this is going to be one of those things that the competition committee cracks down on in a year or two.

Except they called the hell out of it this preseason, and I saw it called a couple times in games this weekend.

IIRC, they called it twice on Mike Williams in one game, and I remember watching the replays and thinking Christ, he wasn't that far off the line.

Yet, looking at the screen shot above, the right tackle is further in the backfield than the flanker is.

[Going Commando]

Especially that RT. He's not even aligned with the centers butt, let alone his waist.

I think you might be mistaking the TE for the RT. The RT is lined up the same as the LT. To me it seems too close to call, especially since you can't really see the center's waste or where the helmets actually fall in line because we don't have a side view.

You've got to have 6 on the LoS right? If that's the case and the helmet-waste rule applies, then I'd say this formation is probably legal.

[Devastate]

There must be a certain amount of players on the LOS. the tackles are not supposed to be off the los that far.. I remember seeing that and saying "hey that's illegal formation!"

Taking another look all 11 men on the screen, there are no receivers you don't see.. I'm only counting 4 or 5 people on the LOS

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Holy crap. The right tackle is lined up further back than the guy flanked to the right!!!

The white guy is the TE and he's not being counted as one of the 7 on the LOS. You can see if you look very closely that the RT is even with the LT. It might be close, but it's not nearly as blatant as it looks if you think Boss is the RT.

The guys on the LOS are the 5 linemen and 2 WRs. Off the line are the TE and another WR.

[The Dude]

Another example of the rules being skewed against the Skins. The league is scared of having us on an equal playing field with other teams.

[#1njskinsfan]

The linemen's helmets have to be aligned with the center's waist if I'm not mistaking.

ding ding ding

[ST is my boy]

Another example of the rules being skewed against the Skins. The league is scared of having us on an equal playing field with other teams.

hahahaha......tell me your not serious.

[KyleVA]

hahahaha......tell me your not serious.

teh hole NFL is scared uv us

[TD_washingtonredskins]

teh hole NFL is scared uv us

...have been for a decade now. :doh:

[jrockster21]

My guess is the 7th man on the LOS is the receiver we do not see. As has been stated previously in this thread, if a players helmet is as far up as the center's waist, they are considered on the LOS which means the gnats arguably had 7 on the LOS.

Very questionable though.

Huh? That pic shows all 11 players. Only 6 are "on" the line.

I only see 10 guys in that picture...I think RTW is on the money here. The 7th LOS player is the flanker out wide to the right.

HOWEVAH

Isn't there a rule that only one wideout can be on the line? I thought that was a rule, but maybe not.

[Dan T.]

The white guy is the TE and he's not being counted as one of the 7 on the LOS. You can see if you look very closely that the RT is even with the LT. It might be close, but it's not nearly as blatant as it looks if you think Boss is the RT.

The guys on the LOS are the 5 linemen and 2 WRs. Off the line are the TE and another WR.

You're right. On the right guard is obscured by the right tackle, so my count was off.

[MattFancy]

The RT is lined up farther back than the WR right next to him

[TD_washingtonredskins]

The RT is lined up farther back than the WR right next to him

Again, look closely. That's Boss (white), not the RT (black). The RT and RG are barely distinguishable, but the RT is even with the LT.

Now, they both could still be pushing the rule...but it's not nearly as blatant as it seems if you believe that Boss (the TE who is off the LOS) is the RT.

[MD.C RedskinsFan]

I'm remember seeing this and thinking what is going on? Surely they are about to call a time out.

[Zguy28]

You're right. On the right guard is obscured by the right tackle, so my count was off.

And those tackles are NOT on the LOS. Guards are, but the tackles aren't. Its sad how predictable pro offense's have become.

If you see tackles like that you know its pass.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

And those tackles are NOT on the LOS. Guards are, but the tackles aren't. Its sad how predictable pro offense's have become.

If you see tackles like that you know its pass.

I absolutely agree that they are probably still breaking the rule. I was just trying to point out the real scenario since most people were using Boss as a reference point for how far back the tackles were playing.

[Devastate]

Some of you are missing the guard between the center and the lt

In order from top to bottom

WR RT RG C LG RT TE WR WR (Eli RB) in back

[RonJeremy]

I think the NFL refs totally sucked in the preseason calling petty stuff, or missing rather blatant holds, etc. I know they are human and miss stuff from time to time..but more and more officiating stinks...not this play necessarily, I'm not sure of the rule but that does look like a questionable formation.

As a Football Official..this one made me laugh the most in this thread.

"I don't know the rules" but you guys suck!

:hysterical:

I will look at at that formation closely and give you an opinion. I mostly work as a Line Judge or Head Linesman. Basically in order for a lineman to be on the LOS he onlys needs to have part of his body breaking the plane of an imaginary line drawn parallel to the LOS through the WAIST of the nearest teammate who is legally on the line, except for the player under the snapper, who is considered a back.

edit: After further review...I definitely have 7 on the LOS. That is a legal formation. It is throwing people because it isn't the way normally you will see an o-line lineup...but it is legal.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

As a Football Official..this one made me laugh the most in this thread.

"I don't know the rules" but you guys suck!

:hysterical:

I will look at at that formation closely and give you an opinion. I mostly work as a Line Judge or Head Linesman. Basically in order for a lineman to be on the LOS he onlys needs to have part of his body breaking the plane of an imaginary line drawn parallel to the LOS through the WAIST of the nearest teammate who is legally on the line, except for the player under the snapper, who is considered a back.

edit: After further review...I definitely have 7 on the LOS. That is a legal formation. It is throwing people because it isn't the way normally you will see an o-line lineup...but it is legal.

Interesting...so it's allowed to have that cascading look. Good info!

[RonJeremy]

Isn't there a rule that only one wideout can be on the line? I thought that was a rule, but maybe not.

You can have two wideouts on opposite sides of the formation on the LOS. Also, if you have two wideout's on the same side of the formation both can be on the LOS but the inside (slot) guy is an ineligible receiver.

If you want to get technical you can have 10 men on the LOS but only the two widest guys on each side of the formation are eligible. You still have to have a QB to take the snap and the rest are linemen. The rule says a minimum of 7..you can obviously have more but it generally doesn't make sense to do so.

[pjfootballer]

RT has created an illegal formation.

[RonJeremy]

Interesting...so it's allowed to have that cascading look. Good info!

Yes, exactly. It looks weird...but by rule is legal.