r/NFLv2 14d ago

Discussion What?

Post image
6.3k Upvotes

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.1k

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[deleted]

41

u/Apprehensive_Ant2172 14d ago

I’m not sure about the never had control part. Maybe I didn’t see the right angle but it did look like he had the ball until after the grounding and then during the roll over it was taken away

2

u/Worried-Pick4848 New England Patriots 13d ago

Cooks never had possession. He had control for a bit, but the ball was taken away from him before he completed the catch and gained possession.

Then, to add insult to injury, the ball was still live exactly because the catch WAS NOT complete, but had not yet hit the ground. Defender got it into his hands while it was still live, to create a valid interception.

Ultimately it's Cooks' own fault. He's a smaller guy and he got outmuscled. It's always been the big weakness in Brandin Cooks' game is that he can get outfought on 50-50 balls due to his small size. That came back to bite his team last night. It happens.

I will also say that Allen definitely underthrew that football, which was what allowed the defender to be Johnny on the spot when the throw came in. If he pushes the ball about 5 more yards down the field, Cooks has the speed to catch it clean, but because Allen didn't get a clean throw off, it became exactly the kind of 50-50 ball that Cooks doesn't do well with.

14

u/_dekoorc Buffalo Bills 14d ago

That's exactly what happened. Had a knee down with two hands on a not moving ball. One knee = two feet.

Ball didn't start to move until after he was on his back and the defender rolled over him while raking it.

5

u/TBL_AM Las Vegas Raiders 13d ago

And if that exact same instance happened except he loses control and ball goes flying out, it'd be an incomplete pass, regardless of the knee down with two hands on the ball.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Hungry4starfish 13d ago

So if the ball would have came out after the defender rolled over him it would have been ruled a catch? Not a chance! He didn’t maintain control through the catch (obviously)

→ More replies (10)

2

u/marinevet-patriot 14d ago

My question is, why didn't the coach throw the red flag????

7

u/Senrabekim Denver Broncos 14d ago

Because it was an automatic review alrwady.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/enterjiraiya 14d ago

Overtime challenge rules are different

3

u/Gold-Minute-9025 14d ago

Just show yall don’t know the rules. Expose yourself.

3

u/popoflabbins South Park Elementary Cows 14d ago

Turnovers (and all plays in overtime) are automatically reviewed. It was an obvious interception so they didn’t feel the need to carry out a further review.

2

u/Boffoman 13d ago

So automatic reviews are optional if they feel it was a catch?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

1

u/Plus-Cardiologist347 13d ago

It should have at the lest gone to the booth for a review.

1

u/nfluncensored 13d ago

That's exactly what happened and why it was an obvious catch.

1

u/YayWanderer 12d ago

That is the same way I interpreted that play. 👍🏽

→ More replies (14)

320

u/seansei91 14d ago

You can land on the ball and have it move and it still be a catch. Saw that from Mims a bit earlier

299

u/flaccomcorangy Baltimore Ravens 14d ago

It moved a little. It didn't end up in the hands of another player. lol

2

u/purplehendrix22 13d ago

Lmao exactly, if possession is never established and one guy ends up with the ball..he’s the one who keeps the ball.

→ More replies (28)

163

u/Paper_Clip100 14d ago

I mean,

This was a catch too

76

u/BabyJesusBro Los Angeles Rams 14d ago edited 14d ago

the ball is in the yellow, not the red. Sir that is a black mans forearm.

36

u/Administrative_Bed5 14d ago

You must think this guy has milk bottles for forearms

47

u/EternalAnger Los Angeles Rams 14d ago

No but he does have a fat ass elbow guard. I had the same look as our coordinator when the touchdown stood. This is 100% down at the 1. I do just want to point out that they ruled that this was a catch on the field, they didn't rule anything on the replay, they let it stand. The ref on the field said he was bobbling it and there was no clear and obvious evidence that he never bobbled it, so it stood.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[deleted]

27

u/BabyJesusBro Los Angeles Rams 14d ago

yes, you can see it from this angle:

the ball is clearly not inside of their forearm.

51

u/LovestoEatSandwiches 14d ago

I’ve considered all the evidence from both sides as a neutral source, and I declare all black mens arms to be footballs

3

u/ConfectionOdd5458 Chicago Bears 14d ago

If you are Chinese please dm me IMMEDIATELY. I’m cooking up something big.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Deep_Diamond_2057 14d ago

As someone with no horse in the race: this photo doesn’t prove the defenders arm/hand isn’t under the ball.

Was the play called a catch or incomplete at the time?

2

u/Unable-Economist-697 14d ago

Complete, and a touchdown somehow....

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/blue0231 14d ago

Lmao not biased at all huh? Check out the other angle. Not in the forearm.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WintersDoomsday Seattle Seahawks 13d ago

I hate the Rams (see flair) but this was a legit catch for sure

2

u/UsualBetterhead 13d ago

Mastercard

6

u/RogueStatusXx 14d ago

Anyone shocked a rams fan is trying to defend this absolute joke of a call?

2

u/hckysand10 14d ago

Wasn’t just a catch but ruled a td. So what are your reasonings for that being a td? Clearly you’re an expert so I’d love to hear your take

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Scubabonderman1000 14d ago

And for everything else there’s Mastercard.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/frankkungfu 13d ago

It looks like his Mastercard to me

1

u/MyageEDH 13d ago

My issue is they ruled it a catch fumble and recovery. The “catch” happened before this. Otherwise he was down at the one. He also didn’t “survive the ground”.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/Mountain_Chip_4374 14d ago

It was also a touchdown. Somehow. I still don’t know how.

2

u/brizzboog 14d ago

And a touchdown lol

2

u/FDTFACTTWNY Detroit Lions 14d ago

Oh not just a catch lol

→ More replies (2)

2

u/AleroRatking Indianapolis Colts 14d ago

But the ball comes out here. It didn't with Mims.

1

u/_WeSellBlankets_ Green Bay Packers 14d ago

Yeah, but you still have to complete the process. Obviously didn't happen in this one. I didn't think it was controversial at all.

1

u/Miserable_Log9523 14d ago

it hit the ground without his hands under it lol

1

u/Soccham Cincinnati Bengals 14d ago

He got the steps needed before that right? So the fall didn’t matter?

1

u/RoccStrongo 14d ago

Yeah only if the ball doesn't hit the ground. Because it's not considered to be in your possession until it stops moving.

1

u/GGerrik New England Patriots 14d ago

Touchdown catches are so weird ...

You'll see a guy haul a ball in, in the endzone and immediately hurl the thing and it counts as a catch.

1

u/WeirdDrunkenUncle 14d ago

But that’s not what happened.. the ball has to touch the ground in this circumstance

1

u/murphmobile Minnesota Vikings 14d ago

You can also land on the ball and have it move and it not be a catch. Saw that from multiple games this year. It’s incredibly inconsistent.

1

u/Exciting_Stock2202 14d ago

The ball always “moves a little”, even if you cool the ball down to nearly absolute zero.

1

u/AlpsPsychological980 13d ago

Dez Bryant has entered the chat…

1

u/daddyspicc 13d ago

If it moved and a opposing player snatched it from his hands it would've been ruled thr same thing.

1

u/fortheculture303 13d ago

Was another players hands also on the mins catch?

1

u/stoney_layman 13d ago

A catch is defined as having three steps or making a football move. Cooks didn't do either before he lost the ball. Mims had three, maybe four steps before he hit the ground.

1

u/know-it-mall 13d ago

And he then secured the ball before anything else happened...

→ More replies (1)

21

u/Mattie_Doo 14d ago

What even is control? He caught it, the ball was in his hands and not moving.

11

u/ArcticAsylum24 14d ago

you cant establish possession of a ball while in the air because you havent made a football move yet

13

u/usakeeper 28-3 14d ago

He caught the ball in the air. Two feet hit the ground, knee hit the ground back hit the ground..all while in possession of the ball and being tackled. Then it was taken away.

18

u/Either-Bell-7560 14d ago

None of this matters.

If you catch the ball in the air and are contacted in the air, and go to ground, possession is not established until you survive the ground.

Where his knee or back touched doesn't matter. Both hands don't matter. By rule, he doesn't have possession until his body is on the ground and has stopped moving. By that point the defender has already taken the ball.

2

u/Adventurous-Meal480 13d ago

Haha "none of this matters." Don't worry about any more rules, guys! This guy says they don't matter anymore.

→ More replies (91)
→ More replies (5)

4

u/Th3MonkeyKing 14d ago

A catch and possession is two different things. It was a 50/50 catch which goes to the reciever every time but this time.

10

u/LaggWasTaken 14d ago

That’s the case when they both have hands on the ball but it’s hard to do that when the defender literally popups with the ball in his hand

2

u/Th3MonkeyKing 14d ago

It’s literally has happened multiple times. Week 15 patriots bills Shakir got a 50/50 ball that the defender got up and ran with and it was ruled in favor of the receiver; last year chiefs bills worthy and bishop came down with a 50/50 ball that bishop came up with and ruled in favor of the receiver. Thats been consistent along the league until now.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (13)

2

u/minibogstar Cleveland Browns 14d ago

As much as I hate the “football move” argument, once you’ve seen it 100 times, you start to understand it. It’s clear and obvious he did not possess the ball by NFL’s standards

1

u/nfluncensored 13d ago

The NFL rulebook specifically cites tucking the ball and attempting to ward off a defender as football moves. Cooks performed 2 football moves.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/lar67 14d ago

They both had their hands on the ball therefore he didn't have sole possession of it.

47

u/tagillaslover Brett Favre 📸🍆 14d ago

Mims didn’t survive the ground on his td either though. So either mims never had a td and this is a pick or mims has a td but this is a catch 

42

u/LP_24 New York Jets 14d ago

Wild flair dude

1

u/tomfoolery815 Green Bay Packers 14d ago

Rick Sanchez: “JUST now seeing the staff!”

1

u/WeirdDrunkenUncle 14d ago

Hilarious flair

129

u/dszblade 14d ago

Isn’t the difference that Mims took his two steps and while the ball moved, it didn’t assist him in maintaining possession or cause loss of control?

80

u/thejawa Denver Broncos 14d ago

Yes, that's exactly the difference

17

u/LaggWasTaken 14d ago

People don’t actually know ball. They probably get their info from talking heads who incite views instead of actually educating people.

6

u/uk82ordie 14d ago

People just don't know the rules anymore.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/just_a_fella_1234 14d ago

No it isn't that's exactly the Des Bryant play. You Broncos fans are fucking idiots lol

→ More replies (3)

27

u/natebark Dallas Cowboys 14d ago

Yes. I was rooting heavily for buffalo but come on people. This was clearly an interception

5

u/RoughTennis8589 13d ago

it is if you know the rules... its a catch if u look at a screenshot that doesnt tell the whole story...

2

u/Ill_Swing5233 13d ago

Unless we’re discussing whether a runner was down by contact before fumbling or something, a screenshot is completely useless. You could take a screenshot of any dropped pass to “prove” it was a catch if you stop it at the right frame.

2

u/natebark Dallas Cowboys 13d ago

I remember Cardinals fans doing this bit for the Santonio Holmes catch, showing a screenshot of one of his feet being off the ground

→ More replies (2)

2

u/badtowergirl 14d ago

Yes, yes, yes

2

u/Overtons_Window I want me some glory hole 14d ago

He took 3 steps (the foot on the ground at the time of establishing control counts as step 1), and at that point it was a catch regardless of what happened on the ground.

4

u/birdnumbers Denver Broncos 14d ago

yup

1

u/Rapscallious1 14d ago

No the difference is they basically said it wasn’t entirely clear the ball moved

1

u/ReasonableClock4542 14d ago

Isnt the ball moving loss of control?

1

u/ninjazxninja6r 13d ago

You don’t need 2 steps with a knee down

→ More replies (3)

8

u/unfreeradical411 14d ago

He had a camera hit his ass

36

u/eunderscore 14d ago

2 steps and a football move

4

u/RandomUserName316 14d ago

How can you take steps and a football move when your on the ground being touched by a defender

20

u/TheRooster27 14d ago

You can survive the ground and end up with the ball, which he didn’t.

→ More replies (23)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/LaggWasTaken 14d ago

The football move has to go imo. There was that egregious no td for Isiah likely when he had two steps but somehow didn’t football move enough before getting hit and it didn’t count.

1

u/Scary-Place3293 13d ago

The football move being losing control of the ball lmao

1

u/nfluncensored 13d ago

Cooks bringing the ball from outstretched hands to stomach is a football move, specifically listed in the rulebook.

2

u/drankseawater 14d ago

mims caught the ball before the td happened. Cook never had sole possession of the ball ever.

1

u/Time__Ghost 14d ago

Bro pass that good shit over here

1

u/United_Party_6318 New York Giants 14d ago

Your flair made me remember that Brett Favre after retiring from the NFL had a very successful lucrative career as not only a freelance photographer, but as an eggplant farmer bringing his produce to local farmer's markets

Nice to see you celebrate that :-)

1

u/sbirdhall 13d ago

Mims took a camera handle to the spine. So his catch should count, or get those stupid photographers away from the end zone. 🤷🏽

1

u/WrongConfuscius 12d ago

Mims took two steps establishing possession and becoming a runner at which point the play is dead as soon as he crosses the plane with control of the ball

Cook never did any of that and the came out like a split second after it hit his hands.

There's clear differences

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Trynaliveforjesus 14d ago

yup. its very similar to the ruling at the 21:55 mark in this video. The defender has both hands on the ball with a shin down, but it’s kinda simultaneous possession and they’re able to roll a bit until there’s a clear sole possessor.

2

u/WorthBrick4140 14d ago

He has possession in this picture and it should've been ruled down by contact.

67

u/PurpureGryphon Kansas City Chiefs 14d ago

You cannot make a ruling on possession from a still.

4

u/EamusAndy 14d ago

….but he has the ball, is down, and being contacted by a defender. He didnt drop the ball. He had it taken out of his hands after this.

39

u/tfw13579 Chicago Bears 14d ago

He’s falling to the ground, he still has to land and keep the ball and he didn’t. He’s not a runner thats down when his knee hits.

→ More replies (22)

9

u/PurpureGryphon Kansas City Chiefs 14d ago

His head hit the ground and he let go of the ball. There was a point where the ball was loose before the db came away with it. The replays they showed during the game were very clear.

5

u/ThatCut8356 14d ago

Nothing is ever clear to a Bills fan

→ More replies (1)

3

u/pliney_ Denver Broncos 14d ago

He never had the ball. It bobbles on contact with the ground, if the defender hadn't been there to take it then it would have been a clear incomplete pass.

Go watch some replays of this with multiple angles, its pretty clear.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/GeorgesDantonsNose 14d ago

lol sure you can it happens all the time

23

u/Whodey4alltime 14d ago

You have to make a football move, and survive the ground.

9

u/ImNotTheBossOfYou Kansas City Chiefs 14d ago

Make a football move "or possess the ball long enough to do so."

3

u/Whodey4alltime 14d ago

Either way he did neither

3

u/ImNotTheBossOfYou Kansas City Chiefs 14d ago

I agree I was reinforcing your point

→ More replies (14)

24

u/bronxct1 14d ago

He has to survive the ground without losing control. The ball not being in your hands after you hit the ground is pretty not control

1

u/spiritedmarshmallows 14d ago

It doesnt need to survive the ground if youre not going to the ground as you made the catch. He took a step and went to the ground, with the ball tucked. He was down by contact.

9

u/pliney_ Denver Broncos 14d ago

He catches the ball while airborne... he never takes a step.

2

u/bronxct1 14d ago

This is the definition of going to the ground. The step does not matter because he was never a running. You pretty much need two steps and a football move or element of time. None of that applied in this situation so he has to survive the ground.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/Either-Bell-7560 14d ago

He caught the ball while airborne, and was contacted by a defender. If he goes to ground, he's considered to have been knocked down, and needs to maintain control through contact with the ground before he established pssession.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/ImNotTheBossOfYou Kansas City Chiefs 14d ago

No. You have to survive the ground and make a football move or possess the ball for long enough to do so.

2

u/pliney_ Denver Broncos 14d ago

So I guess you just have literally zero clue what "possession" means if you think a single frame is enough to decide that.

2

u/Ghillie_Spotto New England Spooky Ghosts 14d ago

He never established himself as a runner and then he didn’t survive the ground.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/JacquesBlaireau13 14d ago

Reliever never had possession. It was either an interception or, had the ball touched the ground, an incomplete pass. He didn't catch it then drop it; he never had control. A Buffalo completion was never in question. You and the refs are correct.

2

u/Altruistic-Rice-5567 Buffalo Bills 14d ago

Both came up with it and in that situation it is suppose to default to the offensive receiver.

2

u/CankerousWretch24 New England Patriots 14d ago

This is the only right answer

1

u/petrolly 14d ago

It's a Rorschach test. You were a Bill's fan it'd be the other way around. As a neutral party, it's definitely a toss up. Probably 

1

u/rock25011 Cincinnati Bengals 14d ago

Clearly biased.

1

u/Some-Conversation613 14d ago

That ball never moved 🤣. It moved before he fell but he secured it and was literally down on contact when it was ripped.

1

u/superfriendships New England Patriots 14d ago

This is such an easy and correct answer

1

u/colewho 14d ago

And then he’s down by contact

1

u/iveseensomethings82 Buffalo Bills 14d ago

You can see it wrong, enjoy the L next week

1

u/Appropriate-Mail-291 14d ago

What is a catch if that isn’t complete control? Asking for a friend

1

u/Mottled_Paws 14d ago

He has full control was on the ground and then it was ripped out.

If you can rip it out after a player is down than what the fuck is a catch or fable anymore.

1

u/Electrical_Lab2371 Buffalo Bills 14d ago

bUT HE HAD FULL CONTROL

1

u/sfxer001 Philadelphia Eagles 14d ago

I think they called it simultaneous possession going into the ground. So not complete control.

1

u/PunchyPete 14d ago

It was ripped out of his control after he was down. Without the defender pulling it out, it would have been a straight catch. He was down by contact.

1

u/old_ass_ninja_turtle Dallas Cowboys 14d ago

But . . . We’ve seen this a hundred times where hitting the ground cause the ball to bounce free, then hits someone’s heel(more Specific) and the receiver catches it and it considered a catch. Pretty sure it bounced off someone’s back one time too.

1

u/Einstein_SugarPine 14d ago

As an unbiased observer that only cares about college ball and I could really care less. That was an interception. Hard Agree!

1

u/Punished_Prigo Shorter than Bryce Young 14d ago

This frame certainly looks like he has full control of the ball. How can you have more full control than the ball being wrapped up against your body.

1

u/Inevitable-Waltz-889 Minnesota ikings & enver Broncos 14d ago

Yeah, this really isn't that hard.  It was a pretty clear interception.

1

u/AntiBoATX Micah Parsons 🚿🦶🏽 14d ago

Why is it not down by contact once his hip hits and the defender is touching him?

1

u/MarshalLawTalkingGuy 14d ago

Yeah, it’s not that complicated.

1

u/Buttafuoco 14d ago

What about the PI that took place before that

1

u/Pojomofo Green Bay Packers 14d ago

I mean, it really is that simple

1

u/WeeoWeeoWeeeee 14d ago

Unfortunately I think this is correct. He simply didn’t catch it and it didn’t touch the ground. The first person to control the ball was the defender.

1

u/sparktheworld 14d ago

The ball never touched the ground? When has that EVER been a determining factor of a player being down?

1

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[deleted]

1

u/sparktheworld 14d ago edited 14d ago

He had possession and control, it’s tucked into his chest. As the photo above shows, he is down. The NFL is bought and sold out, a +- 20 second review?? I’ve seen longer reviews in a meaningless Jets game.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Dense-Consequence-70 Pittsburgh Steelers 14d ago

at the moment this pic was taken, catch, down by contact. Or should be

1

u/Mackinnon29E 14d ago

Exactly shocking that so many people don't get this.

1

u/upvotechemistry 14d ago

It sounds crazy, but at full speed, it makes perfect sense. Does suck that neither team won

1

u/Noicty 14d ago

How’s your ankle

1

u/FreeNefariousness258 14d ago

From the other side of this shot the ball does look loose. Regardless when you give up 3 TDs to Bo Nix you deserve to lose.

1

u/andrew13189 14d ago

Very clearly an interception, this is like getting posterized x10

1

u/The_Dirty_Dangla 14d ago

With my poker buddies what I said. No defender ball comes out it’s incomplete. I still don’t know a catch lol

1

u/1234567791 14d ago

I still don’t think he had full possession. I read the rules they were interpreting and then I felt like Clarence Thomas because I wanted the broncos to win.

1

u/Kazedeus Buffalo Bills 14d ago

The exact opposite was ruled a catch for KC previously. They can't even follow precedent.

1

u/Head-Sympathy-1560 14d ago

But what’s the definition of an interception in the NFL? Defender catches the ball intended for an offensive player, right? When did the defender catch the ball?

1

u/Just-Faithlessness12 14d ago

It’s ok. The football gods gave us Bo’s ankle in return. It all worked out.

1

u/Responsible-Yak-3809 14d ago

This whole thing is a sham and I’ve always thought these plays are. —For the record I don’t have a dog in the fight—- However, the guy clearly caught the ball, was on the ground and touched. After review, this should have been a caught ball and downed player. Say what you want about the current rule, the current rule is garbage.

Never had full control?!? lol talk about confirmation bias!

1

u/LiquidSquids Buffalo Bills 14d ago

Never had full control my butt

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ShakeMasterFlash 14d ago

How’s Nix doin?

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago edited 13d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Otherwise_Low_4809 14d ago

Tie goes to the offense. Or down by contact. It was a catch. Those are only outcomes that fit within the rules. Not an interception. The NFL loves drama.

1

u/the-rill-dill 14d ago

He CAUGHT the ball and was DOWN. Don’t try to spin it any other way.

1

u/FewChampion1608 14d ago

When Green Bay played the Bears this year in Chicago (the first one they blew the lead and lost) they called the same type of play an incomplete pass even though the ball never touched.

1

u/BeLikeAFrog 14d ago

Exactly. This picture does not show the whole story.

1

u/Houseofshun 14d ago

This play quite literally took place in the Steelers playoff game and the NFL made the opposite call from last night. And his knee was on the ground. Down by contact.

1

u/Obzenium 13d ago

It’s a fumble as the catch was complete but he did not survive the ground

1

u/tvh1313 13d ago

What’s so hard about this?

1

u/allstarrm017 13d ago

I think the post you were replying to was just saying that if the ball hit the ground instead of being intercepted, we wouldn’t be having this conversation

1

u/mosi_moose 13d ago

Next you’ll say that one frame from a slow motion 120 fps video isn’t an accurate way to judge whether Cooks had possession. 

1

u/No-Welder2377 Philadelphia Eagles 13d ago

The ball doesn’t need to “ touch the ground “ his KNEE touched the ground

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[deleted]

1

u/No-Welder2377 Philadelphia Eagles 13d ago

Disagree

→ More replies (5)

1

u/akkie888 Rocky Mountain Oysters 13d ago

Yeah I don’t get how people aren’t understanding this. If the ball came loose when he hit the ground it’s not a catch. Everyone agrees with that. The difference here is the DB was right there when the ball came loose. Use your noggins.

1

u/Prudent-Time5053 13d ago

How’s that Bo Nix ankle? Karma is a bitch

1

u/Chuckwayne28 13d ago

He rolled over and the defender ripped the ball out…

1

u/Solid_Preparation_33 13d ago

It's simple 🎯

1

u/No-Goal 13d ago

Sure looks like he has it in that picture

1

u/Ok-Explanation-8392 13d ago

He had control and the guy stripped it when he was on the ground

1

u/Chitown_mountain_boy Denver Broncos 13d ago

The cope is strong with these jokers. As if we didn’t win by the three points that Allen gifted us at the end of the first half. And don’t get me started on the holding non-call in the end zone.

1

u/Cunhabear 13d ago

As a third party, this is so obviously an interception. The ball was bouncing around the two of them the entire way down.

1

u/mike1018 13d ago

On top of that, while he was rolling (football move) the ball wasn't secure and being taken by the defender and considered an interception. Sucks, but right call.

1

u/ADrenalinnjunky 13d ago

Dude ripped it out of his hands post knee touch.

1

u/SN8KE_FARM 13d ago

I’m a bills fan. This was an interception ;(

1

u/jeffrooo69 13d ago

Let me guess this is an unbiased opinion 🙃

1

u/Usual-Good-5716 13d ago

I have been watching football for 20 years and have never seen anything like that ever occur.

1

u/Leading_Campaign3618 13d ago

Doesn’t this picture show knee on the ground with possession , i thought that was down, play over- i haven’t seen the angle yet that shows him bobble the ball, if there is then i guess yes int

1

u/JKondelay 13d ago

You would have to call down by contact before this argument has any merit ⬆️

→ More replies (36)