Fair Catch Interferance (1 Viewer)

[renesauz]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

 

[The Ref]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

Wut?

 

[Frot]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

 

[renesauz]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

 

[Frot]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

but his doing that caused contact, which caused the defender to interferestay away is the answer

no contact = no foul

 

[MDSkinner]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

It seems to me that if the returner can make that sort of quick reaction such that he can monitor the ball well enough to get just far enough out of its path as to lead the hit man astray and then predict which way the hit man is going to swerve and then move toward that guy and be in the path of the ball all within a matter of millliseconds...he deserves to get the call to his advantage.

 

[GregR_2]

Didn't see the play.

Did the returner's jumping off to the side move him into the path of the ball? Or did it move him away from the path of the ball?

 

[renesauz]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

but his doing that caused contact, which caused the defender to interferestay away is the answer

no contact = no foul

Still not getting it.Defender is barrelling down the field at full speed, as he should be.

Returner notices defender is unblocked.

Returner signals fair catch with defender eight yards away travelling at full speed.

Defender starts to slow down, veers to one side of returner to avoid contact.

With defender only two yards away, still with significant momentum, returner hops to one side, directly in defender's path.

Defender has too much momentum, and returner is now directly in his path, less then 2 yards away.

Why do we flag defender? Note...this isn't a half step to the side, or even one slow big step...it's a significant change in the position of the return man.

Similarly, why does the NFL continue to flag DB's for PI when a sprinting WR stops dead in his tracks to come back for an underthrown ball? I think the same reasoning applies. It's my opinion that it is ridiculous to flag a player for any kind of illegal contact when said contact is intiated by sudden and dramatic changes in the positioning, travel direction, or speed of the player who's been "contacted".

 

[Keepers]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

It seems to me that if the returner can make that sort of quick reaction such that he can monitor the ball well enough to get just far enough out of its path as to lead the hit man astray and then predict which way the hit man is going to swerve and then move toward that guy and be in the path of the ball all within a matter of millliseconds...he deserves to get the call to his advantage.

 

[renesauz]

Didn't see the play.Did the returner's jumping off to the side move him into the path of the ball? Or did it move him away from the path of the ball?

Does this matter? We gonna flag the defender for not having eyes in the back of his head?It's too dangerous for a returner to do this on purpose to draw a flag. It's almost certainly an error in his original setup.

 

[GregR_2]

...

Still not getting it.

Defender is barrelling down the field at full speed, as he should be.

Returner notices defender is unblocked.

Returner signals fair catch with defender eight yards away travelling at full speed.

Defender starts to slow down, veers to one side of returner to avoid contact.

With defender only two yards away, still with significant momentum, returner hops to one side, directly in defender's path.

Defender has too much momentum, and returner is now directly in his path, less then 2 yards away.

Why do we flag defender? Note...this isn't a half step to the side, or even one slow big step...it's a significant change in the position of the return man.

Similarly, why does the NFL continue to flag DB's for PI when a sprinting WR stops dead in his tracks to come back for an underthrown ball? I think the same reasoning applies. It's my opinion that it is ridiculous to flag a player for any kind of illegal contact when said contact is intiated by sudden and dramatic changes in the positioning, travel direction, or speed of the player who's been "contacted".

It doesn't even matter if he makes a fair catch signal or not, the same rules apply.You can't obstruct the returner's path to the ball. You can't interfere with his attempt to catch the kick. It doesn't matter if the returner lunges towards the ball late or early, or made you think it was going somewhere else than where it went and in your trying to avoid him you instead obstructed his path to the ball.

The only time you might have a case is if, say, the ball is coming down to the left of the returner, and he instead lunges to the right, away from the ball, and initiates the contact. That's not a penalty because you didn't obstruct his path to the ball.

Rules below:

Section 1 Opportunity to Catch a Kick

Article 1 During a scrimmage kick that crosses the line of scrimmage, or during a free

kick, members of the kicking team are prohibited from interfering with any receiver making

an attempt to catch the airborne kick, or from obstructing or hindering his path to

the airborne kick, and regardless of whether any signal was given.

Item 1: Contact with Receiver. It is interference if a player of the kicking team contacts

the receiver, or causes a passive player of either team to contact the receiver,

before or simultaneous to his touching the ball.

Item 2: Right of Way. A receiver who is moving toward a kicked ball that is in flight

has the right of way. If opponents obstruct his path to the ball, or cause a passive

player of either team to obstruct his path, it is interference, even if there is no contact,

or if he catches the ball in spite of the interference, and regardless of whether any signal

was given.

Penalties:

(a) For interference with the opportunity to make a catch when a prior signal

has not been made: Loss of 15 yards from the spot of the foul, and the offended

team is entitled to put the ball in play by a snap from scrimmage. See 4-8-2-g.

(b) For interfering with a fair catch after a signal: Loss of 15 yards from the spot

of the foul. A fair catch is awarded even if the ball is not caught. See Section 2,

Article 4.

 

[Jayrod]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?

All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

 

[renesauz]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

I absolutely understand and agree with this reasoning. I do understand it. But if you want to make this argument (and it's a good one), then you need to consistantly require returners to make their fair catch signal early enough that defenders have plenty of time to adjust. The NFL has NOT done that. It's quite normal for the signal to be made with defenders only 8-10 yards away travelling at high velocity. Said defenders have enough time to avoid a stationary return man, but not enough to stop and avoid a return man making dramatic last second adjustments.

 

[GregR_2]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

I absolutely understand and agree with this reasoning. I do understand it. But if you want to make this argument (and it's a good one), then you need to consistantly require returners to make their fair catch signal early enough that defenders have plenty of time to adjust. The NFL has NOT done that. It's quite normal for the signal to be made with defenders only 8-10 yards away travelling at high velocity. Said defenders have enough time to avoid a stationary return man, but not enough to stop and avoid a return man making dramatic last second adjustments.

If it's a legal fair catch signal they do have enough time to avoid a return man. But they instead choose to come quite close to him to be in position to pick up a muff, or better yet to distract him in order to cause a muff.From your own words the problem wasn't that the guy didn't have enough time, but that he was ignorant of where the ball was coming down. That's on him, not the returner. Blaming a returner for misleading the opposition as to where the kick is coming down is like getting upset at a QB for using a cadence that draws the opposing D offsides. It's not only not his job to let the defender know what's happening, but it's to his team's benefit if he can deceive the other team into not knowing.

 

[VaTerp]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

I absolutely understand and agree with this reasoning. I do understand it. But if you want to make this argument (and it's a good one), then you need to consistantly require returners to make their fair catch signal early enough that defenders have plenty of time to adjust. The NFL has NOT done that. It's quite normal for the signal to be made with defenders only 8-10 yards away travelling at high velocity. Said defenders have enough time to avoid a stationary return man, but not enough to stop and avoid a return man making dramatic last second adjustments.

If it's a legal fair catch signal they do have enough time to avoid a return man. But they instead choose to come quite close to him to be in position to pick up a muff, or better yet to distract him in order to cause a muff.From your own words the problem wasn't that the guy didn't have enough time, but that he was ignorant of where the ball was coming down. That's on him, not the returner. Blaming a returner for misleading the opposition as to where the kick is coming down is like getting upset at a QB for using a cadence that draws the opposing D offsides. It's not only not his job to let the defender know what's happening, but it's to his team's benefit if he can deceive the other team into not knowing.

Furthermore, how many times a season does this scenario that the OP is talking about really happen? I have NEVER seen a fiar catch interference call that resulted from the PR "moving over" at the last second.And if returners really are doing this to try and draw a penalty (something that IMO happens VERY RARELY if at all) then they are significantly increasing their risk of muffing the ball. I returned punts in HS and the thought process that the OP is suggesting returners have never even entered my mind. It's hard enough to field the ball cleanly without worrying about a last minute jump into the path of an oncoming defender.This is seriously a NON-ISSUE IMHO.

 

[RUSF18]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

I absolutely understand and agree with this reasoning. I do understand it. But if you want to make this argument (and it's a good one), then you need to consistantly require returners to make their fair catch signal early enough that defenders have plenty of time to adjust. The NFL has NOT done that. It's quite normal for the signal to be made with defenders only 8-10 yards away travelling at high velocity. Said defenders have enough time to avoid a stationary return man, but not enough to stop and avoid a return man making dramatic last second adjustments.

Speaking of perspective...if you're worried about a defender being 10 yards away not having enough time to see a fair catch, think about what happens in that first 40 yards (assuming a 50 yard punt). It takes time to snap the ball, kick the ball, for the ball to reach its highest point...the gunner has covered a lot of the 40 or so yards by then. How much faster do you really want the returner to signal for a fair catch...before the ball has reached its apex?

 

[GregR_2]

I agree, VaTerp. It isn't a winning proposition to intentionally try to deceive someone like this. Certainly not on any kind of regular basis. The consequences of a turnover outweigh the gain in field position from a possible penalty.

In fact the only time I can think of I'd think it would be worth trying would be... down by 1 or 2. Time expired during the punt. If you fair catch it where the ball is coming down, your kicker is too far out of range to try a fair catch kick field goal on an untimed play. But if you could draw a 15 yard penalty he might be in range.

That's a situation where it would pay off to try it since if you don't you lose anyway. Otherwise, not worth risking the turnover to try to draw the penalty.

 

[TWP]

When I saw this play, I actually thought the fair catch signal was made pretty late and also pretty small/ambiguously. When I saw the cover guy coming at him I thought he was going to destroy him because he didnt see the fair catch signal at all. I'd like to see a slow replay of the play, because I'm not sure that the fair catch signal really was a legal signal at all -- although it may have been but just somewhat borderline...

 

[Frot]

Every week I watch players signal for a fair catch, and catch the ball surrounded by defenders, often well within the required cushion. No call when technically there should be.

Often, the reciever waits until fairly late to make his signal, and the defender veers off to one side, passing by the receiver within the cushion, but not touching the receiver. No call..and probably shouldn't be if the signal came late.

Then there's what happened during Philly-Detroit game. Fairly late signal, but not ridiciulously so. As a result, Philly defender veers off to one side, clearly attempting to avoid contact. After having been settled in one position for a couple of seconds, the Detroit return man hops directly to one side, literally in the last half second before the ball arrives, straight into the path of the oncoming defender. Flag comes out for...you guessed it...Fair catch interferance. Funny thing is, had the defender stayed his initial course, he would have passed the return man without touching him.

In my mind...that should be unsportsmanlike conduct on the returner-he clearly initiated the contact-or at the least...a non-call.

What say you?

I don't think there is a required cushion

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

If the defender interfere's with the catch, it is a flag, if not there is not

Read my initial post again. I'm not arguing with the technicality of the call. The play in question shows that the returner can initiate the contact, and still draw the penalty. That's where I take some issue. The return man initiated the contact when he took a last second, significant hop step directly to one side at the last possible second.

but his doing that caused contact, which caused the defender to interferestay away is the answer

no contact = no foul

Still not getting it.Defender is barrelling down the field at full speed, as he should be.

Returner notices defender is unblocked.

Returner signals fair catch with defender eight yards away travelling at full speed.

Defender starts to slow down, veers to one side of returner to avoid contact.

With defender only two yards away, still with significant momentum, returner hops to one side, directly in defender's path.

Defender has too much momentum, and returner is now directly in his path, less then 2 yards away.

Why do we flag defender? Note...this isn't a half step to the side, or even one slow big step...it's a significant change in the position of the return man.

Similarly, why does the NFL continue to flag DB's for PI when a sprinting WR stops dead in his tracks to come back for an underthrown ball? I think the same reasoning applies. It's my opinion that it is ridiculous to flag a player for any kind of illegal contact when said contact is intiated by sudden and dramatic changes in the positioning, travel direction, or speed of the player who's been "contacted".

because there was contact, which means the defender interfered with the catchif the fair catch was too late they should have waived it off, if not the defender has to stay clear

 

[Frot]

Have you ever tried to catch an NFL punt?All advantage in a fair catch goes to the returner because he has to adjust to a missle coming out of the clouds...often with a wind and some kind of rotation involved moving the ball as much as 5 feet away from its normal trajectory.....returners don't have time to worry about where the defenders are in a fair catch and thus it is the coverage teams responsibility to avoid the contact. That's why the rule is the way it is and that's why they call it the way they do. I've never heard a single NFL player complain about the fair catch rules as they are written because they all know and understand the situation.

I absolutely understand and agree with this reasoning. I do understand it. But if you want to make this argument (and it's a good one), then you need to consistantly require returners to make their fair catch signal early enough that defenders have plenty of time to adjust. The NFL has NOT done that. It's quite normal for the signal to be made with defenders only 8-10 yards away travelling at high velocity. Said defenders have enough time to avoid a stationary return man, but not enough to stop and avoid a return man making dramatic last second adjustments.

If it's a legal fair catch signal they do have enough time to avoid a return man. But they instead choose to come quite close to him to be in position to pick up a muff, or better yet to distract him in order to cause a muff.From your own words the problem wasn't that the guy didn't have enough time, but that he was ignorant of where the ball was coming down. That's on him, not the returner. Blaming a returner for misleading the opposition as to where the kick is coming down is like getting upset at a QB for using a cadence that draws the opposing D offsides. It's not only not his job to let the defender know what's happening, but it's to his team's benefit if he can deceive the other team into not knowing.

yeah, i think you said it better

 

[Insein]

Too subjective. Just can't run into the returner. I saw the play and coleman needs to get his head in the game and come under control. Otherwise, a defender that doesn't fair catch will make an easy juke and blow right by him.

 

[The_Wolfman]

It's the defender's responsibility to not contact the return man when he signals for a fair catch. The return man has a right to catch the ball on any part of the field and if he signals for a fair catch then he also has the right not to be interfered with while making that catch. It doesn't matter where on the field he ends up making the catch, the onus is on the defender not to hit him. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.