StPaulHusker Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Terrence Garvin of the Pittsburgh Steelers annihilated Punter Kevin Huber during a run back by Antonio Brown. Dean Blandino, head of NFL officiating says that Huber is a defenseless player "throughout the ENTIRE play." Mike Golic of Mike and Mike in the Morning had something to say about it. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10155375/dean-blandino-head-nfl-officials-says-hit-kevin-huber-was-illegal Quote Link to comment
GSG Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 That defenseless throughout the down thing is BS, but it definitely should've been a penalty and a fine. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Golic is being pretty dumb in this instance. Blandino wasn't offering an opinion, he was referencing the rulebook, which states that a punter is defenseless the entire time. If you're going to get all angry, get angry at the rulebook, not at the head of officiating citing it. Or just cry about it. Quote Link to comment
Creighton Duke Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Don't play football..just don't Quote Link to comment
Ulty Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 The article in the link refers to it as a blindside hit. I agree that it was deserving of a fine due to the helmet being used, but blindside? The guy came at him directly from the front, the punter just wasn't looking. Illegal, yes. Vicious, yes. Blindside, no. Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted December 18, 2013 Author Share Posted December 18, 2013 I hate the retro-active punishments and officiating that is going on. Quote Link to comment
ShawnWatson Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Mike and Mike is possibly the worst radio show ever created. 2 Quote Link to comment
Hoosker Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Mike & Mike is extremely popular, which obviously means it sucks ass. Quote Link to comment
walksalone Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Mike & Mike is extremely popular, which obviously means it sucks ass. Well, pop music sucks and is extremely popular... Quote Link to comment
louisianared Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 It was a cheap hit and he deserved whatever punishment he got. No need for that kind of thing in football. Quote Link to comment
Hoosker Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Mike & Mike is extremely popular, which obviously means it sucks ass. Well, pop music sucks and is extremely popular... Yeah, that's what I mean. I wasn't being sarcastic haha. Quote Link to comment
True2tRA Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I can't listen to that guy. His high pitched whining is almost enough to sear a hole right through my ear drums. The guy is a douschebag and when he takes a stance on something he tends to take it to the extreme. Almost refusing to see the other side of the argument. They pull this act all the time, this good guy/ bad guy thing. I believe it is an act a lot of times. But still annoying as hell. The other Mike, not the heavier one, is like a weasel with a voice and hard to take serious. Unfortunately I've heard that radio show a few too many times. Quote Link to comment
HuskerShark Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 A lot of you are missing the point of what Golic said. He conceded that the hit should have been a flag/fine. The thing that he was upset with was the rule that a punter is a defenseless player throughout the entire play. I have to say I agree with his stance on this. If a punter is defenseless and is going to be protected during the entire play by the refs, then he shouldn't be able to make the tackle either. It's just another unrealistic rule made by a group of people who have probably never actually played the game of football - especially not on the level that these players do. It's such a fast game out there, and for the big wigs to expect these NFL players to slow down, recognize that the guy is a punter, and have it register in his mind that "okay, this is the punter so I can only block him half as hard as I normally would" is completely unrealistic. Quote Link to comment
Notre Dame Joe Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I see it more often concerning the qb after an interception. If he is blocked hard, a flag is thrown. Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted December 19, 2013 Author Share Posted December 19, 2013 A lot of you are missing the point of what Golic said. He conceded that the hit should have been a flag/fine. The thing that he was upset with was the rule that a punter is a defenseless player throughout the entire play. I have to say I agree with his stance on this. If a punter is defenseless and is going to be protected during the entire play by the refs, then he shouldn't be able to make the tackle either. It's just another unrealistic rule made by a group of people who have probably never actually played the game of football - especially not on the level that these players do. It's such a fast game out there, and for the big wigs to expect these NFL players to slow down, recognize that the guy is a punter, and have it register in his mind that "okay, this is the punter so I can only block him half as hard as I normally would" is completely unrealistic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_competition_committee This makes it even more confusing as to why the rules are the way they are. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.