Deacfreak07
Ain't played nobody, PAWL!
#humanelement
If the rule was enforced on the punter, technically a punter could bat the ball to avoid giving up a safety and just give up a touchback.
So in other words, there's no reason to call it on a punter because there's no way the opposing team would benefit.
No you can only get a touchback if it goes through your opponent's end zone. If a punter batted it out of the back it would be no different than when a safety snaps it through the end zone, safety.
I knew the rule (the Panthers got called for it a few years ago on a fumble recovery) but figured maybe there was some discretion if the ball would have gone out without the batting because it was so egregious.
That's my point. It would make sense to enforce it on the punter because it would benefit the punting team.
Okay, I'm just confused. I don't understand how a punter would force a touchback by batting it (rule or no rule). Probably not worth diving into.
Unger for Graham was a baffling trade to begin with. Willson is a solid TE and they could have drafted a young pass catching TE. Graham is in decline.
Yeah. It was a good trade for the Saints.
The batting thing, while illegal, is being way overblown. There was no Lions player anywhere near the ball. It's not like bro dove to bat the ball and save a TD or something.