The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Should NFL punters be considered defenseless?

Expert
22nd December, 2013
10

Aussie NFL punter Sav Rocca recently stated on DC sports radio he doesn’t believe punters want to be considered defenseless when covering a return, but is that really a good idea?

The rule labeling punters and kickers as defenseless has entered the spotlight this week, after the NFL announced they will be fining Pittsburgh Steelers special teamer Terrence Garvin $25,000 for his nasty blind side block on Cincinatti Bengals punter Kevin Huber.

The hit broke Huber’s jaw and cracked a vertebra in his neck.

Ironically, the hit wasn’t called for a penalty by the refs at the time, but the NFL made it clear in the days after that Garvin would be punished for it, reminding that the punter is ruled as defenseless while on the field.

Despite the rule being initially implemented in 2010 (to the best of my knowledge), it was only after this missed penalty that serious discussion has been made regarding whether or not a punter trying to make a tackle should be considered defenseless.

Rocca has some experience with big hits but, as he stated in his interview, believes punters should be treated as any other player on the field.

His fellow punters have also made their opinions on the matter clear, with Seahawks punter Jon Ryan saying, “once you go down there and kind of get in on the tackle, I think you’re fair game”.

Advertisement

He believes the hit was illegal, but that otherwise the punter in pursuit of the ballcarrier should be fair game for a big block.

Bizarrely, he also remarks he wasn’t even aware of the rule that has protected him this season.

The Indianapolis Colts punter Pat McAfee agrees, stating the rule reinforces the notion “that punters and kickers aren’t really athletes or football players”.

It’s true such stereotypes exist in the NFL, despite some of the media’s attempts to put it to rest.

They are, after all, footballers. And while most NFL punters wouldn’t have the kind of experience Rocca had, thanks to his AFL career, they’d still likely have played other positions before the NFL and undoubtedly know how to tackle and, perhaps more importantly, how to take a hit.

For clarity, when a player is considered defenseless they cannot be struck in the head or neck by the head, shoulders or arms. Nor can they be hit by the crown of a player’s helmet on any part of their body.

(You can see the full rule set regarding defenseless players here.)

Advertisement

Keep in mind, any player who is blind-sided by another (as in, hit from behind or his side) is considered defenseless and is afforded the above protections.

Even if punters weren’t considered defenseless, in the play that injured Huber, he would have been defenseless due to the hit coming from his blind-side.

While obviously hits like the one he took need to be avoided – and frankly, helmet-to-neck/helmet contact in general – the issue with this rule is that, when applied by the book, it has some unintentional consequences, as pointed to by PFT’s Mike Florio.

For example, by rule, a ball carrier would be unable to stiff arm or lower his head to break a tackle attempt made by a punter.

Certainly, incidental contact to the helmet and neck are not called, as such contact is bound to occur after the tackle is made.

But the fact the ball carrier is unable to make what is considered one of the most iconic football moves to avoid a tackle is absurd.

The fact is, when a punter sees his kick is going to be returned, potentially to the house, he’ll do everything in his power to stop the play.

Advertisement

Whether that means making the tackle or pushing the returner out of bounds, the punter knows, just as any NFL player knows, he’s putting his body on the line when looking to initiate contact.

If he’s out of the play or, as it is with all players, is blind sided, obviously they should be protected.

But when covering their kicks, as Rocca himself states, punters don’t need special consideration.

close