the spirit of the rule is not for the defense to not know who is eligible, its so if you go heavy you still have more than 1 eligible reciever the D has to account for...they tried to trick everyone and it backfired. That is why in the end the only eligible OL is the one the refs announce so the D is not in the dark on who can go out into a route...
But if 70 was announced as eligible who would the defense cover? They still wouldn't have covered 68 because he wasn't announced as eligible.
exactly, ill take my chances that the refs cant get away with letting an ineligible OL catch the ball as opposed to them not calling an illegal formation that we all know they are not gonna change.
Correct. But after the formation shift, 70 was ineligible and didn't need to be covered and Bell could have played rover to help out anywhere there was a need. That's the "in the moment" recognition I'm talking about. In their alignment, Bell could have shifted left because most of the actual eligible receivers were on that side and the RB only had 1 man to beat if Goff went that way.
This is true, but they were depending on the defense to get it wrong despite the number being announced. I don't really have a problem with that. If the number is announced and the defense covers the wrong player, it deserves whatever happens. But it is the offense's responsibility to make it clear to the ref who is reporting, and that's where Detroit tried subterfuge and it failed.
Yes and no. It would have been perfectly legal if 68 had been reported to the defense as an eligible receiver. Once 70 was reported eligible, it meant 68 was illegally downfield, illegally was the first to touch a pass, and 70 was lined up in an illegal formation. It all comes down to exactly what the 3 OL did before the snap and why Allen interpreted it as 70 reporting as eligible. Did he just screw up or did theirs attempt at deception go so far as to actually deceive the ref. Whatever the case, the refs got it right after the fact by calling the penalty. No way they could let it stand after announcing 70 as eligible.
100% agree if they cover the wrong guy that is 100% on the D
I still think you are expecting too much from the defense. Point out an example where a defense didn't put coverage on an eligible receiver because he was in an ineligible spot. I don't think you'll find one or if you do, it would be rare.
I have high standards for my defense. Get that bum Quinn out of there, insert me and the defense's IQ goes up immediately. Lol.
But if 70 proceeds to catch the ball and the refs don't call the penalty, that seems to be asking for trouble that cannot be reviewed.
Not sure the league permits deceiving opponents to the extent we'd think. There's an Athletic article that mentions how the details of Detroit's attempt to pretend to report eligible are likely dangerously close to the rule against simulating substitutions, which is also to prevent attempts to confuse the defense. Here's an old article on the substitution rule that we were flagged for in 2017. https://www.footballzebras.com/2017...stitution-call-will-now-come-after-a-warning/
This is tantamount to cheating. Subverting clear and established rules is cheating. Using deceptive plays that do not subvert rules are acceptable.
But it happened on the other side of the line exactly that way and the refs did throw the flag.
I guess teams only focus on penalties called against them. All the other ones in their favor mean little, hahaha.
