Dixon blocked punt, no roughing?

[brucebruce]

Rules experts: Why no roughing call?

 

[Ellard80]

if you block the ball then there is no roughing...

you could break his leg off and still no penalty if you hit the ball

 

[OldSchool]

Because he blocked the punt

 

[FaulkSF]

Touched in flight:

Roughing or Running Into the Kicker | NFL Football Operations

operations.nfl.com

 

[dang]

Rules experts: Why no roughing call?

Surprised at the question. Didnt you see the punt completely stuffed back into the punter?

 

[brucebruce]

Surprised at the question. Didnt you see the punt completely stuffed back into the punter?

you need a hug bro

 

[MrRiceGuyRJ]

If ball is hit first, punter is no longer protected. Similar to when a ball is tipped on a pass, intended receivers are no longer protected

 

[Merlin]

you need a hug bro

The NFL isn't a shitty flag football league. Yet.

 

[dang]

you need a hug bro

No thanks. Just surprised at the question. Unless you meant it as blue font comment.

 

[GoodBadUgly]

If ball is hit first, punter is no longer protected. Similar to when a ball is tipped on a pass, intended receivers are no longer protected

I don't believe this is true. If a ball is tipped, and a WR is creamed ala "defenseless receiver", they will throw the flag.

I think that was OP's concern. It didn't occur to me at the time (probably too peeved by the result, and assumed since it was blocked there'd be no flag), but the more I think about it.... An argument could be made that breaking a dude's leg after blocking a kick and the ref feeling like the contact may have been avoidable, well, THAT might not fall under the penalty protection and would violate the spirit of the rule.

And once you agree there are circumstances where a blocked punt could result in a flag, you're just arguing where to draw that line.

 

[dieterbrock]

I don't believe this is true. If a ball is tipped, and a WR is creamed ala "defenseless receiver", they will throw the flag.

I think that was OP's concern. It didn't occur to me at the time (probably too peeved by the result, and assumed since it was blocked there'd be no flag), but the more I think about it.... An argument could be made that breaking a dude's leg after blocking a kick and the ref feeling like the contact may have been avoidable, well, THAT might not fall under the penalty protection and would violate the spirit of the rule.

And once you agree there are circumstances where a blocked punt could result in a flag, you're just arguing where to draw that line.

If the ball is touched before contact is made with the punter, there can be no roughing the kicker. Likewise, if the ball is tipped, there cant be pass interference.
A defenseless receiver play is a different penalty.
There aren't degrees of contact that a ref has power over. If the punter breaks his leg during the play, it doesnt necessitate a penalty, just like a QB getting his leg broken during a sack

 

[GoodBadUgly]

If the ball is touched before contact is made with the punter, there can be no roughing the kicker. Likewise, if the ball is tipped, there cant be pass interference.
A defenseless receiver play is a different penalty.
There aren't degrees of contact that a ref has power over. If the punter breaks his leg during the play, it doesnt necessitate a penalty, just like a QB getting his leg broken during a sack

So if a guy blocks a punt and on his way down pulls out the punter’s Adam’s apple and kills him for sleeping w his wife, no flag?

Got it.

 

[RhodyRams]

So if a guy blocks a punt and on his way down pulls out the punter’s Adam’s apple and kills him for sleeping w his wife, no flag?

Got it.

well it depends on how long it takes to rip out the adams apple...it could be flagged as holding

 

[Merlin]

kills him for sleeping w his wife

 

[RamFan503]

Yeah... This one has run its course - and then some.