Originally Posted by Archie
So, you raise the key question. Did he have possession? You assert that he did. I believe “by rule” he did not. He had no more possession then the player who left his feet, catches the ball in the air, breaks the plane of the end zone, and then lands out of bounds.
By rule, a player who goes to the ground in the process of making a catch must control the ball through the contact with the ground. Otherwise it’s not a catch and THERE IS NO POSSESSION. It is not different then the example I gave earlier of catching the ball on the fly in the end zone but landing out of bounds. By rule you must get two feet, a knee, etc for it to be a catch. The determination of a catch (and all the elements of that fact) are evaluated first.
1st off, it is not the same as catching the ball in the air and breaking the plane of the end zone...
Alexander got 2 feet down and a knee.
There is no where that says the determination of a "catch" is to be evaluated 1st.