Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Hey Guys:

During the second half of the 1975 AFC Title Game, Jack Lambert recovered a fumble near the Pittsburgh sideline. Replays showed that his feet slid out of bounds before he fell on the ball. The officials awarded the Steelers the ball. My question is, should his recovery have been disallowed? I know that if a receiver has his feet out of bounds and then catches the ball, it is ruled an incompletion. I'm thinking that someone recovering a fumble should have his feet inbounds also for it to be a legal recovery. To the best of your knowledge, am I correct? Thanks for your responses.

Sincerely,
Joe Zagorski

Joe Zagorski wrote:Hey Guys:

During the second half of the 1975 AFC Title Game, Jack Lambert recovered a fumble near the Pittsburgh sideline. Replays showed that his feet slid out of bounds before he fell on the ball. The officials awarded the Steelers the ball. My question is, should his recovery have been disallowed? I know that if a receiver has his feet out of bounds and then catches the ball, it is ruled an incompletion. I'm thinking that someone recovering a fumble should have his feet inbounds also for it to be a legal recovery. To the best of your knowledge, am I correct? Thanks for your responses.

Sincerely,
Joe Zagorski

Under current rules, it would not be a recovery. I'm pretty sure it was the same in 1975.

From Article 7, Section 2 of the 2015 NFL Rulebook: "Item 2. Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a
player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands,
completely on the ground inbounds ... "

First time I ever heard of that rule was in 2001, Pats at Bills. David Patten caught a pass and was knocked out and lost the ball. His head was out of bounds, and the ball brushed up against his feet before Buffalo recovered. The officials ruled that the ball was out of bounds.