I do not think the replay showed conclusive evidence that the ball left his possession. Has nothing to do with it hitting the ground by the way.
If you mean Gresham's play, there was one replay angle that looked like it showed that his hand separated from the ball while it was on the ground just a bit before he scooped it back in.
I saw the replay, I just didn't think it was enough to overrule the catch. Also, he made the catch before he got in the endzone. Shouldn't it just have been foot down and ball across the plane?
No, you're talking about rules (breaking the plane) that apply to a player in possession of the ball. Gresham was not in possession of the ball in the rules-sense of the term. He was a player in the act of making a catch. Here's the details:
The NFL requires all of the following to make a catch and be considered a player in possession of the ball in bounds:
A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
© maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long
enough to do so.
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of
possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body other than his hands
to the ground, or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch.
If you do the three things above before you go out of bounds, go to the ground, or go in the endzone, then it is a catch and you are in possession of the ball as a ball carrier no different than any other player who has possession like a RB after a handoff. If you complete those 3, then all you have to do is break the plane of the goal line for it to be a touchdown, same as any other ball carrier.
But, Gresham did not fulfill the 3rd part of the catch before going in the end zone, going to the ground, and out of bounds all three as it happened. From the replays I'm seeing he doesn't even gain control until the ball is already in the end zone. After he has the ball clasped in both hands, he gets two feet in bounds and is going to the ground and has stepped out of bounds before he has had the ball long enough to "perform any act common to the game".
Ok, so since he didn't gain possession in bounds, then we have to apply the additional rules regarding going to the ground, out of bounds, and catches in the end zone when making a catch.
Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.
Item 3: End Zone Catches. If a player controls the ball while in the end zone, both feet, or any part of his body other than his hands, must be completely on the ground before losing control, or the pass is incomplete.
He was fine with Item 3, he got both feet completely on the ground. But they ruled that he did not maintain the ball THROUGHOUT the process of going to the ground. I don't know from the one replay that I saw if the ball moved enough to be a loss of control, but that was their ruling.
I personally wouldn't compare this to Calvin Johnson. Calvin Johnson's was a contentious play because he lost the ball while trying to stand up using the momentum of his going to the ground. The question there was, "Was his act of going to the ground done, and was he instead in the act of rising". It's more of a judgment call. I'd agree with the refs the act of going to the ground wasn't done yet since his body was still under its momentum.
The issue in this play is completely different. There is no question like with Calvin as to whether he'd finished going to the ground. Clearly he hadn't.
The only question is did the ball move in his hand to where he lost control. I think I can kind of see it move a little bit, but at least with only having the 1 replay I'm not sure enough I'd have overturned. Maybe the other replays showed more though, I'm not sure, have only seen the 1 angle.
Doesn't change the fact that it's a stupid rule and Megatron wasn't showboating when it happened. He was basically already on his back when the ball came out. It's not always possible, especially when making such a highlight reel catch, to get both hands wrapped around it. And regardless of your opinion of the rule, it's absolutely absurd for someone to have 8 body parts hit the ground with possession and have a completion taken away because it slipped out while he was getting back up.
