Jump to content

Blocked punt or Roughing the Kicker?

Hwy17

By Hwy17
in The Huddle

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hwy17 College Back Up

Hwy17

Posted
Posted

Too bad I don't have a video clip of this.  Here's what happened - Two defenders rushing the kick get to the punter; the first defender blocks the punt as the second defender hits the kicker after the punt is blocked.  The punter never fully extended his leg. The ball bounces off the ground and then the first defender catches it in the end-zone for what appears to be a touchdown.  The officials throw a flag for roughing the kicker.  Having seen a lot of blocked punts before, I've never seen a roughing the kicker call on a block.  


Perspective College Starter

Perspective

Posted
Posted

Florida follows the NFHS rules (except when they don't  . . . and this does not appear to be one of those times where Florida has a different or modified rule).  

Per the 2018 NFHS FOOTBALL RULES BOOK

 

Running into or roughing the kicker or holder. A defensive

player shall neither run into the kicker nor holder, which is contact that

displaces the kicker or holder without roughing; nor block, tackle or

charge into the kicker of a scrimmage kick, or the place-kick holder, other

than when:

a. Contact is unavoidable because it is not reasonably certain that a

kick will be made.

b. The defense touches the kick near the kicker and contact is

unavoidable.

c. Contact is slight and is partially caused by movement of the

kicker.

d. Contact is caused by R being blocked into the kicker or holder by

K.

(emphasis added)

I don't see anything in the 2019 changes that apply.   It would appear that the officials missed this one.   The only possible argument that they might have is that the hit by the defender who actually ran into the punter was 'avoidable contact,' which would be a judgment call.   

 

 

 

 

Hwy17 College Back Up

Hwy17

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Perspective said:

Florida follows the NFHS rules (except when they don't  . . . and this does not appear to be one of those times where Florida has a different or modified rule).  

Per the 2018 NFHS FOOTBALL RULES BOOK

 

Running into or roughing the kicker or holder. A defensive

player shall neither run into the kicker nor holder, which is contact that

displaces the kicker or holder without roughing; nor block, tackle or

charge into the kicker of a scrimmage kick, or the place-kick holder, other

than when:

a. Contact is unavoidable because it is not reasonably certain that a

kick will be made.

b. The defense touches the kick near the kicker and contact is

unavoidable.

c. Contact is slight and is partially caused by movement of the

kicker.

d. Contact is caused by R being blocked into the kicker or holder by

K.

(emphasis added)

I don't see anything in the 2019 changes that apply.   It would appear that the officials missed this one.   The only possible argument that they might have is that the hit by the defender who actually ran into the punter was 'avoidable contact,' which would be a judgment call.   

 

 

 

 

From my vantage point, - A. B. and C. would have applied.   Its my understanding that NCAA rule is different but we go by NFHS rules. 

HornetFan National Prospect

HornetFan

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

Too bad I don't have a video clip of this.  Here's what happened - Two defenders rushing the kick get to the punter; the first defender blocks the punt as the second defender hits the kicker after the punt is blocked.  The punter never fully extended his leg. The ball bounces off the ground and then the first defender catches it in the end-zone for what appears to be a touchdown.  The officials throw a flag for roughing the kicker.  Having seen a lot of blocked punts before, I've never seen a roughing the kicker call on a block.  

I think the call was incorrect. If the punt was blocked, it should not have been roughing the kicker. Are you sure the officials didn't call a personal foul on the 2nd rusher for hitting a defenseless player?

Hwy17 College Back Up

Hwy17

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, HornetFan said:

I think the call was incorrect. If the punt was blocked, it should not have been roughing the kicker. Are you sure the officials didn't call a personal foul on the 2nd rusher for hitting a defenseless player?

I can't speak as to the officials reasoning here, however as stated above ; Contact is slight and is partially caused by movement of the kicker.  

  • 3 weeks later...
Hwy17 College Back Up

Hwy17

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So I found out what apparently happened.  Before the play, one of the officials (line judge or back judge) blew a whistle before the snap. But no flag was thrown, and neither team head the whistle, and both teams went threw with the play.  Which begs to question, how can the defense be charged with roughing the kicker when it was a dead ball no play and would have been a legal hit anyways?  

HornetFan National Prospect

HornetFan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:

So I found out what apparently happened.  Before the play, one of the officials (line judge or back judge) blew a whistle before the snap. But no flag was thrown, and neither team head the whistle, and both teams went threw with the play.  Which begs to question, how can the defense be charged with roughing the kicker when it was a dead ball no play and would have been a legal hit anyways?  

It could have been a dead ball, unnecessary roughness call, but it still sounds like the referees mishandled the call.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • DILLARDBOYZ954
      Teddy Bridgewater begs for donations

      By DILLARDBOYZ954 · Posted

      And that’s where I’m at with it. I’m sure teddy heart is in the right place. But if we’re gonna keep it real, between last year and this upcoming year MNW has received well over 50 transfers a lot of them that are from different counties and stay nowhere near MNW.    some of them maybe because of changing environments for a better life etc etc, but it’s also 2025 and lot of the transfers was to follow the hype train.    while the uber rides can be a touchy subject depending on the kids situation, he also mentioned he needed thousands in donation for recovery, I get it he went pro and a lot of these assets he had in the league, but a lot of what he’s asking for isn’t even a high school requirement.    when I played ball out recovery was a ice bath lol. He then went on to say 4,000 a week for food ? , what are they eating lobster.    then he said for the three day gym stay he had to front 14,000 dollars for the kids. 14,000 to sleep in the gym for 3 days for what I’m assuming is for team building, is still insane. 
    • Perspective
      Teddy Bridgewater begs for donations

      By Perspective · Posted

      Nolebull, You are making a good argument for what the rule ought to be or why the rule ought to be changed.   I'm telling you what the rule is.  Interestingly, I witnessed first hand the FHSAA deal with a case that was very similar to the (presumably, hypothetical) one you just described.  A family provided a kid with a bed for the night because that kid had an unfortunate family situation that would have left him homeless for the night had a teammate's family not stepped up and given him a place to stay for the night.  Yep, you got it, impermissible benefit.  Coach and school penalized.  The difficulty is coming up with rules that can't be taken advantage of.  Where do you draw the line?   If paying for an Uber is OK, why can't you just buy the kid a car instead?  More convenient for all parties.  If you can buy a kid a meal, why can't you take his family grocery shopping and let them stock up?  Or, better yet, just give then a gift card and let them spend the money as they please.  What do you do when one school offers up a $1,000 gift card, but another school is willing to give the kid a $2,000 gift card?  Do we really want to turn high school sports into professional sports?
    • nolebull813
      Teddy Bridgewater begs for donations

      By nolebull813 · Posted

      Some kids NEED to transfer to get in the best position to change the trajectory of their entire life. Could literally save their life. Difference between going to college and being stuck in your neighborhood getting lost to streets.    And I can only speak for myself, but I’m more interested in a at-risk kid changing his situation for the better in hopes of saving his life than your favorite high school team losing a game because he transferred from your favorite school. 
    • nolebull813
      Teddy Bridgewater begs for donations

      By nolebull813 · Posted

      I wouldn’t be so critical of the FHSAA if they didn’t lie and say they give 2 craps about student athletes. I wish people would just be honest. But I guess if they were honest, it would mess up their hustle. 
    • nolebull813
      Teddy Bridgewater begs for donations

      By nolebull813 · Posted

      Wait are you saying there is a rule that bars an adult mentor who coaches young men a sport from helping a struggling student athlete and his family with transportation? Whoa that’s next level crazy.    “Hey coach I’m on the side of the road and almost got hit. I’m miles from school and it’s 110 degrees out. Can you get me a ride?” ”Sorry. Some turds 6 hours away in Gainesville said I can’t. Hope you don’t get hit or pass out.” 

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...