Swinging Gate Formation

[SoIndRef]

This is for an extra point try

Wanted to check on eligibility on this play.  13 is the snapper, 14 and 81 are off the line.  6 is the holder and 7 is the kicker.  Is 13 eligible to receive a pass?  He is on the end with 81 off of the line.  

 

        18    56  52   63   59   51               13

14                                                                         81

                                                               6

                                                         7

[JQWL]

yes he is.

[Bobref]

3 minutes ago, SoIndRef said:

This is for an extra point try

Wanted to check on eligibility on this play.  13 is the snapper, 14 and 81 are off the line.  6 is the holder and 7 is the kicker.  Is 13 eligible to receive a pass?  He is on the end with 81 off of the line.  

 

        18    56  52   63   59   51               13

14                                                                         81

                                                               6

                                                         7

He’s on the end of the line, wearing an eligible number. So, he is eligible.

[SoIndRef]

1 minute ago, JQWL said:

yes he is.

We thought so, but wanted to double check.  

[Bobref]

5 minutes ago, SoIndRef said:

We thought so, but wanted to double check.  

Does this reference a specific game? The “swinging gate” can present a real challenge for the officiating crew. If there’s Hudl video I’d like to take a look at it.

[SoIndRef]

24 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Does this reference a specific game? The “swinging gate” can present a real challenge for the officiating crew. If there’s Hudl video I’d like to take a look at it.

Not from us, we were having conversations at an association meeting and someone had a still of the play.  

 

Most were of the mind that 13 was eligible, but some were adamant the other way.  

 

Would the same eligibility rules be true on something other than a scrimmage kick?  For example, if A were to line up in the same formation, with 6 being Qb and 7 being an RB.  Would 13 still be eligible with five linemen meeting numbering requirements and him still eligible by positioning and numbering, even with him snapping the ball?

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, SoIndRef said:

Not from us, we were having conversations at an association meeting and someone had a still of the play.  

 

Most were of the mind that 13 was eligible, but some were adamant the other way.  

 

Would the same eligibility rules be true on something other than a scrimmage kick?  For example, if A were to line up in the same formation, with 6 being Qb and 7 being an RB.  Would 13 still be eligible with five linemen meeting numbering requirements and him still eligible by positioning and numbering, even with him snapping the ball?

Still eligible. 

[SoIndRef]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

Still eligible. 

 

What, other than position, would not allow 13 to be eligible to receive a pass?

If K did NOT have 5 players with 50-79, would the numbering exception not allow 13 to be eligible?

[Yuccaguy]

@SoIndRef

18 would be ineligible by number if the left tackle was 50-79.   13 still eligible.  

Edited September 8, 2025 by Yuccaguy
clarity

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, SoIndRef said:

 

What, other than position, would not allow 13 to be eligible to receive a pass?

If K did NOT have 5 players with 50-79, would the numbering exception not allow 13 to be eligible?

As long as he’s on the end of the line and wearing an eligible number, the numbering exception does not matter. He’s always going to be eligible.

Now, there is one uncommon scenario where #13 could be on the end of the  line and be ineligible. See if anyone comes up with it.

[SoIndRef]

11 minutes ago, Bobref said:

 

Now, there is one uncommon scenario where #13 could be on the end of the  line and be ineligible. See if anyone comes up with it.

Would it be if they do not have five players with 50-79 on the line?  They would have an illegal formation?  But he would still be eligible by number and positioning.  It just becomes a foul at the snap.

 

 

 

 

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, SoIndRef said:

Would it be if they do not have five players with 50-79 on the line?  They would have an illegal formation?  But he would still be eligible by number and positioning.  It just becomes a foul at the snap.

 

No, there’s a way #13 can be on the end of the line but be ineligible.

[Yuccaguy]

4 hours ago, Bobref said:

No, there’s a way #13 can be on the end of the line but be ineligible.

(the) Numbering exception comes into play then with THAT positioning with regards to the #13 player as described.  50-79

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, Yuccaguy said:

(the) Numbering exception comes into play then with THAT positioning with regards to the #13 player as described.  50-79

The only way #13 can be on the end of the line and be ineligible is if he originally lined up as an interior lineman under the numbering exception, and a shift then “uncovers” him. Once he lines up between the ends under the numbering exception, he remains ineligible during the down. 7-2-5b Exception 2

1 hour ago, Yuccaguy said:

Edited September 9, 2025 by Bobref

[JustRules]

The other way this could be an issue is if they are doing this with 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down and one of the ineligible numbers was replaced by an eligible number (replace 63 with 36). On those downs you can only have one number exception. In my example, 36 is the exception. The other part of the rule is the numbering exception in that case has to be the snapper. By definition, the exceptions are interior players so 36 is the exception and not 13. So basically you can only do a swinging gate on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down if you have 5 ineligible numbers like the original formation. A FG scrimmage kick formation is likely only to be used for a FG attempt on those downs for a last second attempt at the end of the half. A team is very unlikely to use a swinging gate in those situations.

For those old enough to remember the coach in Colorado who came up with the A-11 offense. That was the cause of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd down numbering exception. The A11 would have all 11 players on offense with eligible numbers. The snapper would get on the ball, but the other 10 players would start off the line with the QB lined up 10 yards behind the LOS. Before the snap, 6 of the players would shift to the LOS, get set for a second and then run a play. The formation met the definition of s scrimmage kick formation (punt version) so they could use any number of numbering exceptions. It created a lot of confusion because the defense didn't know until right before the snap who would be eligible by position. They were a smaller team playing larger teams so it was a way for them to be competitive. The rules committee felt they were exploiting the intent of the rule so they changed the rule to not allow a team to run the A-11 offense. But that change has confused a lot of officials. They think the snapper always has to be an interior lineman.

[SoIndRef]

Appreciate the back and forth.  It was more just for confirmation for our thinking but it is nice to see random and unlikely (hopefully) scenarios.