Hit on Bengals punter

[Raymond]

Too bad Blandino doesn't have a forum.

Is this one of those situations where a certain non-football official is trying to learn something about football officiating or just here to complain?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hbk314

You're calling a player defenseless when he isn't defenseless. How is that at all logical? I can't like or dislike what isn't there.

He is defenseless by "rule", not by the Webster Dictionary.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hbk314

I understand that they're defenseless by rule, but they're not defenseless in reality. They're free to pursue or not pursue the play just like anyone else on the field.

And? What were you hoping to learn by complaining about the rule here?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Had it not been the punter who was blocked, was this otherwise a legal block? Or was our non-punter A1 otherwise defenseless?

Not in my opinion, no. In addition to the punter being defenseless, in my judgment the blocker made contact with the crown of his helmet to the neck/chin area of the punter.

I'm looking at this through the lens of NCAA but I believe the NFL is the same in regard to hitting with the crown and Blandino does seem to allude to that by mentioning the crown.

And let's keep this discussion on the play please, not the individual personalities involved in the discussion.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by hbk314

One potential issue is that you have the punter ona return potentially in with all of his teammates. It shouldn't be the responsibility of a return team member to have to identify the one guy out of the 11 he can't block a certain way.

Again ... people much closer to the actual situation, who have vested monetary interest in both the success of the game and the safety of players, disagree with what SHOULD or SHOULD NOT be. If you disagree so drastically about what should be in this sport ... stop watching.

Seems to me you need to seriously decide whether you're here to learn or here to complain. You started this thread with the pretense of learning, but you certainly aren't there anymore.

[Rich]

At anything below the NFL level, I'm flagging this as UNR without a second thought regardless of the location of the crown of the helmet.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Rich

At anything below the NFL level, I'm flagging this as UNR without a second thought regardless of the location of the crown of the helmet.

How does the block need to be made to not be UNR for you? I assume it's not that he was blocked in the first place, because the punter was, imo, in position to make a play had he not been blocked.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich

At anything below the NFL level, I'm flagging this as UNR without a second thought regardless of the location of the crown of the helmet.

I think in NCAA this hit meets both types of targeting so I agree.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Had it not been the punter who was blocked, was this otherwise a legal block? Or was our non-punter A1 otherwise defenseless?

The way I would interpret Blandino's statement is that this was only an illegal block on the punter. Why else would he cite that "the key" is that punters are considered defenseless players by rule when talking about the hit? I'd think that if it were a block that he viewed to be illegal no matter who was being blocked, he would have said that.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I think in NCAA this hit meets both types of targeting so I agree.

What are the criteria for those?

[APG]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Had it not been the punter who was blocked, was this otherwise a legal block? Or was our non-punter A1 otherwise defenseless?

I think the only other case to be made would be to whether this was a blindside block...if it is, the blocked player would receive all the same protections of a defenseless player.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by hbk314

What are the criteria for those?

Two types of targeting in NCAA:
1) Initiating contact with the crown of the helmet. (9-1-3). NOTE: this does NOT require that the targeted player be defenseless.

2) Initiating contact to the head and neck area of a defenseless player by using the helmet, hand, fist, forearm, elbow, or shoulder (9-1-4).

NCAA Defines defenseless players in rule 2-27-14:
Defenseless Player

ARTICLE 14. A defenseless player is one who because his physical position and focus of concentration is especially vulnerable to injury. Examples of defenseless players are:

a. A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass

b. A receiver attempting to catch a pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.

c. A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.

d. A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick.

e. A player on the ground.

f. A player obviously out of the play.

g. A player who receives a blind-side block.

h. A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.

i. A quarterback any time after a change of possession.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by hbk314

The way I would interpret Blandino's statement is that this was only an illegal block on the punter. Why else would he cite that "the key" is that punters are considered defenseless players by rule when talking about the hit? I'd think that if it were a block that he viewed to be illegal no matter who was being blocked, he would have said that.

It's also possible because that one is black and white. He's a punter so you can't hit him high. The blindside hit is much more subjective but would also qualify as defenseless (aka protected).

Every other "crown of the helmet" example I've seen has involved the player lowering their helmet and leading with it. Here is I see him leading with the face of his helmet into the upper chest (generally OK) which resulted in the top of his helmet hitting the facemask and chin. I'm OK if the powers that be want to consider that hitting with the crown of the helmet because it will help reduce these unnecessary high hits.

[Ref inSoCA]

There is no logic. Blandino is not an official and, apparently, knows nothing about officiating. The worst Commissioner is all of sports has made the NFL a joke.

That was a geat block that cleared a hole for the runner. If the punter is such a pussy, he shouldn't be out there.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Ref inSoCA

There is no logic. Blandino is not an official and, apparently, knows nothing about officiating. The worst Commissioner is all of sports has made the NFL a joke.

That was a geat block that cleared a hole for the runner. If the punter is such a pussy, he shouldn't be out there.

Is this a rules based in interpretation or your own personal thoughts?