Really, there is a distinction? In my mind a kick that is noted as being blocked (both on the broadcast of the game and in the NFL.com play-by-play notes) is blocked. I don't see this as a reach (in any way shape or form) since in my mind there is nothing to reach for. Our rules say ANY blocked kick and there is no distinction to where the ball lands or how far it travels. The kick was blocked and the line of scrimmage being broken does not seem to be part of the equation.
Also, not sure what you mean by the NFL defintion since it was their play by play that noted that it was partially blocked. For the record, I assume that a partially blocked kick is one where the punter is still credited with some yardage but since our rules say any blocked kick I am not sure why the partially makes any difference.
Like I said, other than the fact that the baby was fussing and I ended up watching the bonus coverage I would not even have known about this. However, the announcers said it was a blocked punt so I checked the play-by-play when I did not see it credited.
To me this should be 3 more defensive points based on the way our rules are written.
Mike: Just noticed your edit:
Quote:
|
Any punt that is blocked and does not cross the line of scrimmage can be recovered and advanced by either team. However, if offensive team recovers it must make the yardage necessary for its first down to retain possession if punt was on fourth down.
|
This supports that there are other types of blocks (ie. partial blocks) that do pass the line of scrimmage. What I mean is that there should be another part of this: Any punt that is blocked and does cross the line of scrimmage...
Also, to you point about the distance the punt travels why would the NFL.com site bother to note it was blocked if it did not matter. What I mean is why not just list it like a “shank” that traveled 22 yards?