Just a question why would this not be illegal batting?
I have brought this up before. There is a case play directly on point, although I think it has some faulty logic:
6.3.1 SITUATION B: During a field-goal attempt, R1, who is in the end zone, leaps up and blocks the ball away from the crossbar.
RULING: Touchback. The touching by R1 in the end zone causes the ball to become dead, unless the ball caroms through the goal, thus scoring a field goal. This is not illegal batting, as the touching caused the kick to fail. (4-2-2d(2); 6-3-1b)
In essence, they are saying touching precedes batting, but the definition of batting is the intentional striking or slapping of the ball, which is "touching". Doesn't seem right.