causes me to state the truth, whether I, or anyone else, likes it or not.
In this case, the video evidence is strikingly clear. There are really only two reasonable possibilities.
1. Because the view from the best angle clearly shows the space between the fist's impact point and the initial assailant's* testicular region, Occam's Razor and common sense naturally require that we come to the conclusion that it was a punch to the thigh.
2. The aforementioned conclusion that seems thoroughly obvious from the strikingly clear video evidence is wrong, because it's merely an optical illusion. That conspicuous space between the fist and the mystical hidden zone wasn't really there. Because, well, then this wouldn't be nearly as juicy as if we sensationalized it.
You're free to choose which you will accept, but I'm giving this one to Occam.
* Initial assailant: The youngster who decided to slam unnecessarily into the fellow who had been on the ground for some time with the football immobilized