Was the onside kick a fumble? (1 Viewer)

[rick6668]

Had a prop bet: Which team will have more fumbles lost?

Was the onside kick a fumble lost? I don't think so, but I wanted some opinions.

Thanks.

 

[bakes]

I don't think that the Colts ever had possession - the ball bounced off the guy's lid.

 

[bryhamm]

No, I don't think so. To be a fumble, you have to have possession. Might be ruled a muff.

 

[Kevrunner]

Had a prop bet: Which team will have more fumbles lost?Was the onside kick a fumble lost? I don't think so, but I wanted some opinions.Thanks.

I wouldn't think so because no player ever had possession of the football.

 

[Andrew74]

No, I don't think so. To be a fumble, you have to have possession. Might be ruled a muff.

This is what I'm thinking.

 

[AB in DC]

T.Morstead kicks onside 12 yards from NO 30 to NO 42, impetus ends at NO 44. RECOVERED by NO-J.Casillas.

Don't see the word "fumble" in there anywhere.

 

[ICON211]

I think since the Colts never had possession technically it is just a recovered onside kick, no fumble. The way it reads in the play by play:

T.Morstead kicks onside 12 yards from NO 30 to NO 42, impetus ends at NO 44. RECOVERED by NO-J.Casillas.

 

[David Yudkin]

Kickoffs are livve and either team can recover. I don't see it ruled as possession and a fumble.

 

[rick6668]

Thanks everyone I agree, just wanted some opinions.

No fumbles in the game then from what I saw.