"Intent to Deceive"
November 9th, 2015 at 1:02 AM ^
The rule wasn't applied correctly from what I can tell. I believe the point of the rule is that, at some point (not sure when, hasn't been long), college football decided they didn't want players taking two steps onto the field just before the snap. I can sort of understand their rationale there. However, Butt wasn't substituting into the game, he was in the play before and never came off of the field.
November 9th, 2015 at 5:35 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 9th, 2015 at 7:01 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 10:20 AM ^
The explanation, which I commented on, is further down in the thread.
November 9th, 2015 at 7:56 AM ^
No. Actually, his interpretation is correct. Butt did not come from the sideline. He never left the field. Therefore, no "unsportsman-like conduct" should have been called.
November 9th, 2015 at 9:27 AM ^
Those asking about the intent to deceive penalty at Mich, can't use any tactic simulating substitution to deceive. Hide out is a foul.
— Mike Pereira (@MikePereira) November 7, 2015
November 9th, 2015 at 10:22 AM ^
No. He's wrong.
The "unsportsmanlike conduct" in this situation does not only apply to players entering the field. It applies to players who make it appear that they are LEAVING the field.
I'm sorry, but you don't understand the rule.
November 9th, 2015 at 9:59 AM ^
at all
November 9th, 2015 at 8:49 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 9th, 2015 at 10:01 AM ^
is the opperative word.
Butt didn't leave the huddle with the 3 other players, he waited then left the huddle behind them.
What's the cuttoff for distance between a player leaving the field and one simply leaving the huddle? It was a judgement call by the official, imo a poor one.
November 9th, 2015 at 10:39 AM ^
The big difference to me is that Butt left the "huddle" before the team even huddled to call the play. You see him milling around, then he jogs toward the sideline, and only after he's several yards away does the team huddle together to get the call. How would he know the play if he wasn't in the huddle? And when else does Jake Butt line up two yards from the sideline? It was clearly intended to deceive the opponent, regardless of what Harbaugh says.
November 9th, 2015 at 10:53 AM ^
Where Jake Butt lines up is the smoking gun to me. I won't be convinced that hiding Jake Butt wasn't the whole point of the play unless someone can find another play where a receiver was lined up next to the sideline like that.
And if the point was to hide Jake Butt by having people think he was being substituted, then the call was correctly made.
November 9th, 2015 at 10:48 AM ^
He left the huddle by himself. The other players continued to huddle as he took his position. I don't necessarily think that the move was deliberately intended to deceive, but it clearly was fully capable of being intentional. That's the kind of thing coaches should teach their players to avoid, so I don't really have a problem with the call.
Any rule that involves "intent" will be a judgement call.
November 9th, 2015 at 11:03 AM ^
SB Nation had a good writeup of the call here.
Tl;dr - they got it right. Now let's all stop arguing.
November 9th, 2015 at 1:04 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 1:14 AM ^
to the BYU/Air Force call.
There's also the call in a GT/Clemson game and in the '98 Sugar Bowl when Cooper called a fake field goal (it's at ~1:04:00 of the youtube video...which has the entire game)
In the case of that '98 Sugar Bowl, what I didn't understand about the call (which may have been a turning pt. in that game) was that an FSU player actually spotted the deception but not in enough time to actually cover the receiver...couldn't understand how that was called under those circumstances...that was a big turning pt. in that game, as the TD was called back and OSU wound up missing the FG try.
November 9th, 2015 at 1:50 AM ^
I believe the rule was instituted to make illegal a play that was used (with great effect) about 60 years back, where one of the offensive innovators saw a loophole and exploited it. I read about this play, but forget who ran it or what team it was, but I remember it being in the 50's.
Make a substitution, but only have 10 men in the huddle. At the last second before the snap, a WR steps on to the field. At the snap, he is obviously not covered and it would be a huge play.
Rules were changed for obvious reasons. The rule I believe was misapplied here, as Butt was not coming off the bench.
I have less of a problem with the call than most though. Harbaugh will try to stretch every rule to the limit. Butt clearly left the huddle early and jogged to his position in a similar manner to those who took the exact path to the bench in the actual substitution. It's Rutgers job to account for all 11 men on the field. They can call a timeout if they realize a man is uncovered.
I haven't heard anything in the rules about when a player can leave the huddle to line up. I believe Harbaugh tried something completely in the rules as they are written. The refs made a judgement call that was wrong... but if the rule makers don't like someone exploiting a loophole they should rewrite the rule. It should not be up to the refs to make a call that doesn't fit the rule.
It was a game where you could test how the refs will call a rule and blow a play if it doesn't work out. No big deal.
November 9th, 2015 at 2:00 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 2:39 AM ^
The rules specifically cover this exact scenario. The play is explicitly illegal.
A1 leaves the field of play during a down. Team A huddles with 10 players. Substitute A12 enters, and A2 simulates leaving the field but sets near the sideline for a "hide-out'' pass. RULING: Penalty—15 yards from the previous spot. This is a simulated replacement of a player to confuse opponents.
This is almost EXACTLY what Michigan did, with Butt being player A2.
November 9th, 2015 at 3:29 AM ^
Personally I felt like it was a stretch of the rule not a break. Butt was in the huddle, Ran over after the substitutions where made. I'm not the most objective of viewers and he did run a little close to the sideline but, I feel thats more on Rutgers not paying attention.
November 9th, 2015 at 7:26 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 8:31 AM ^
What with no huddle offenses being a thing, I'm not sure I see the point. On the replay there was time and distance between Butt's movement and the substitution package.
November 9th, 2015 at 9:50 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 1:41 PM ^
The rule doesn't say anything about huddles. Not being in the huddle just makes it more obvious. The rule says that using the substitution process to deceive the opponent and gain an advantage is illegal. 3 guys were running onto the field while Jake Butt was running off the field, making him part of the substitution process.
November 9th, 2015 at 8:35 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 9:16 AM ^
Pointless situation? On our own 15 with about a minute left, the 55 yards or whatever he gained are far from pointless. In fact, it was the difference between Michigan having the ball in plus territory with a chance for at least a field goal, and Rutgers getting the ball back (which they did) in great field position (which they got even more of) and kicking a field goal of their own. It's at least a 6 point swing. And the best time to try something like that out, in a low-risk situation.
November 9th, 2015 at 9:22 AM ^
were beating the living hell out of Rutgers and all that we were going to do for the rest of the day was beat the living hell out of Rutgers. We did not need that play to beat the living hell out of Rutgers because the living hell was being beat out of them already.
That is why I actually believe that it was, somehow, someway, a set up for later in the season for the play or a version of the play to be run legally.
November 9th, 2015 at 9:55 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 10:07 AM ^
are misunderstanding what I am saying. I believe Harbaugh has a very good knowledge and understanding of the rules. He certainly did not need points from that possession as we were clearly going to blow them out and already were in fact. I believe he thought it to be about 50-50 that he would be flagged for the play. If we did not get flagged then it would be teams heads for the rest of the year and could be a distraction to future defenses we play and could also run it again at a more important time. If we did get flagged, he could get clarification as to how, if at all, the play could be ran legally because now it is presumed that we cannot run it at all when that may not be the case.
So, in staying with my theory that Harbaugh is playing chess while most other coaches are playing checkers, I believe he ran the play for an ulterior motive than to just get a big gain. I think he may have been testing the waters, planting seeds of doubt, and/or creating false senses of security for future opponent.
November 9th, 2015 at 1:58 PM ^
I wonder if Jim Schwartz was sitting at home yelling at the TV...
"KNOW THE RULES!"
November 9th, 2015 at 9:20 AM ^
That excerpt is just an example of a play that the rule is intended to ban. The rule basically is a catch all that says you can't use substitutions in a way to gain an advantage, which is wide open for interpretation. We didn't do exactly what the example showed, but it's fairly reasonable to say what we did was deceptive. Stupid rule, but the zebras got it right (whether he actually knew the rule or just thought Butt came off the bench is debateable).
November 9th, 2015 at 9:27 AM ^
I guess what bothers me with the penalty is that if you watch the replay, Butt lines up at the same time as everyone else. If he has to wait in the huddle and break with everyone, he's never going to get to his spot in time (I know that isn't the intention of the playcall).
This seems similar in ways to the way New England was using eligible/ineligible recievers last year to confuse Baltimore in the playoffs. Is there intent to deceive the defense? Sure, but isn't that the idea behind half of the offensive plays used in football? Michigan shouldn't get penalized because Rutgers can't count three guys running off and three guys running on. Receivers leave or never join the huddle all the time.
November 9th, 2015 at 11:21 AM ^
The problem was that there was a group of players actually leaving the field at the same spot Butt was heading for. He looked like he was running to catch up with them, and would leave the field along with them. But then he didn't.
That's what was deceptive about it. If Butt had been heading to the other side of the field, there would have been no deception, as that was the Rutgers sideline and there were no subs exiting the field in that area.
That's the rule of thumb refs use in deciding whether something is deceptive or not: If it would look the same heading toward the other sideline, it's OK.
November 9th, 2015 at 4:01 AM ^
Disregard, deleted my original post since I think I misinterpreted the scenario.
November 9th, 2015 at 7:15 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 10:55 AM ^
You are almost exactly correct.
November 9th, 2015 at 2:13 PM ^
and in that I agree. And in that is the argument.
Butt was not, in fact, A2.
In this play, A1, A2, and A3 left the game, and A12, A13, and A14 came in. At some point thereafter, A4 left the huddle (please show where a huddle is even required, since I'm pretty confident it is not, from watching teams not huddle quite frequently) and lined up toward his sideline. Yes, he left earlier than other players. Yes, he was wide. Can you show me in the rule how long he is supposed to wait before poor Rutgers is supposed to actually pay attention? How close to the ball does he have to line up to avoid fooling poor Rutgers?
The notion that it's perfectly clear that this play was against the rules seems ludicrous to me.
Rob
November 9th, 2015 at 5:33 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 9th, 2015 at 2:36 AM ^
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/11/7/9689248/michigan-foo…
Note--Butt is player A2 in the description below:
"A1 leaves the field of play during a down. Team A huddles with 10 players. Substitute A12 enters, and A2 simulates leaving the field but sets near the sideline for a "hide-out'' pass. RULING: Penalty—15 yards from the previous spot. This is a simulated replacement of a player to confuse opponents."
Harbaugh is rarely wrong, but I think he is dead wrong here. The way the rule is written, this is not a legal play. I think almost any officaiting crew would throw a flag on it, though with the quality of officiating, you might slip it past some of them.
If Butt had broken the huddle with everyone else, it would have been fine.
November 9th, 2015 at 5:30 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 9th, 2015 at 5:46 AM ^
I'm mainly amazed that the side judge actually remembered the rule and called it correctly. How often does the opportunity even come up to call it?
November 9th, 2015 at 7:15 AM ^
1. He reads the entire rulebook, unlike most fans.
2. It's obviously part of his job. There are 8 guys on the field now, and each of them has a job before and during the play. Part of his is likely to count the number of players running off and on the field. If you watch the replay, his flag is thrown as soon as the ball is snapped, meaning that he knew he was throwing it when he saw 4 coming off and 3 coming on with one of the 4 stayed on the field.
November 9th, 2015 at 8:23 AM ^
The ref knew he was going to throw it because he is a Sparty (I don't really know that but it sounds plausable)
November 9th, 2015 at 11:26 AM ^
I get it, but how often do you even get the opportunity to call that play? I think we found one other instance in D1 so the answer is basically "Perhaps once in your career". Pretty impressive to catch it right away in what's likely the only instance of it he'll see in his career
November 9th, 2015 at 10:08 AM ^
officials know the rule book front to back or they don't make the cut.
Its the side judge's job to watch substitutions on every play along with spotting the football after every play, not to mention watching for infractions such as offsides, offensive movement, illegal formations and and any other infractions that occur on the periphery during a play.
In fact side judge's are typically more engaged in a game than any of the other officials because they have so much direct responsibility on every play.
November 9th, 2015 at 8:04 AM ^
November 9th, 2015 at 8:13 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 9th, 2015 at 9:41 AM ^
Probably not.
If he stops at the numbers and sets, I doubt they'd call that. The way he heads all the way over to within a few yards of the sideline - even crossing the LOS by a few yards and then backing up, looks like he's trying to hide.
He definitley "broke the huddle" early (before the 3 subs even got there), but still after the original 3 were off the field. If he sets in a more obvious position, they probably let it slide. It's the gray-area timing combined with where he lined up that crossed the line.
November 9th, 2015 at 10:40 AM ^
Agreed.
November 9th, 2015 at 10:46 AM ^
You may disagree with the rule, but as the rule is written, I think it is pretty clear Michigan broke it. Or at least bent it enough that having a flag thrown is within reason.
It's a judgement call. If you asked me, "was Michigan using substitution patterns to try and trick Rutgers into not covering Butt?" I would answer "Yes". And according to this rule, that draws a flag.