I don't see any way, shape or form how that is not a catch. He had clear control the entire time, mostly because the fucking gloves these guys use are like suction cups, but that is another story. It was amazing athleticism and instinct to move the ball the way he did throughout the process.
I'm not entirely convinced he wasn't bobbling the ball against his leg while his right foot was down. It didn't look secure to me until after his foot was off the ground.
no question re athleticism. i don't see clear possession in any way shape or form until right leg kicks up and helps him secure it, but that leg never comes back down. But I guess I don't care after all.
Blandino said that he didn't think it was a catch but there wasn't clear evidence on the replay to over turn it. What this means is either that the NFL doesn't know what a catch is or it was a catch. Why the head of officials would say it wasn't a catch but he couldn't prove it is beyond me. I think the NFL needs to re-examine the catch rules. Start from scratch if necessary because it is embarrassing how often something that looks like a catch isn't and more rarely something that doesn't look like a catch turns out to be a catch after all. How about we get rid of the "football move" clause to start?
college seems to do a pretty good job with it. then again they do a much better job with just about everything replay related. fucking people just need to stop trying to watch everything in slow motion 50 fucking times. bad calls are going to be made no matter what happens.
The problem is it a catch in bounds where he has complete control of the ball with two feet in bounds. He can pin it against his crotch for anyone cares out of bounds. The question isn't whether he maintained control out of bounds because he did as unconventional as it was. The question was whether he had control when he was in bounds.
And the answer to that is no. He was still trying to secure it when his right foot came off the ground.
