I've read a few articles criticizing Hyde on the muffed punt return. How is it possible that some of the local media guys still do not understand the rule? There's no risk in what Hyde did--only potential benefit.
Printable View
I've read a few articles criticizing Hyde on the muffed punt return. How is it possible that some of the local media guys still do not understand the rule? There's no risk in what Hyde did--only potential benefit.
I know the rule and have for a while, his play was still stupid. Yes, it is true he cannot muff the punt, but if Hyde picks the ball up and maintains possession for even a split second he can now fumble the ball as normal. I envision him picking the ball up and without yet tucking it away having it knocked out of his hands. Fumble. Without going back and watching, I remember 6 Patriots surrounding him. This makes the potential for a decent return basically nothing while the potential for disaster slightly higher. Just leave the ball alone. It'll be brought back to where it was first touched anyway.
Well I can't speak for the media but I forget this rule every other year. So its possible.
Also, there was never any ruling on the field about the Patriots touching it so it was entered in the GameBook as a muff.
How would you know?
Anyway, It is kind of a crazy rule - or rather circumstance that requires such a rule. And Chan's visions of disaster aside, I kinda like the nerve and confidence of Hyde to go after it and try to get yardage. Wonder what the coaches are telling him in the film room.
It makes a little more sense if you think of it like this: when the kicking team touches a punted ball beyond the LOS it is illegal touching. That's the technical term, even though you don't see penalty flags come out when it happens (unless the first toucher was OOB). If the kicking team illegally touches but doesn't kill the ball, the receiving team will always have the option of taking the ball where it was illegally touched.