I want to know how this was not ruled a fumble on the field in OT. I saw a very similar one in the night game and they called it as such. That absolutely stings not ending the game there.
The guy upstairs was mentioning requiring a third step BUT that is only one thing refs can look for to establish a catch.
No, they didn’t.
It was established a few weeks ago in a game we played(I believe it was a Jets receiver) who held the ball away from his body because the DB was reaching in from behind to try and pop it out. It was established on that play that possession of the ball can be obtained without securing the ball to the body.
In the replay of this play, you can clearly see that the receiver catches the ball perfectly in his hands(establishing possession), and brings it to his body under his control(making a literal football move). When it gets to his body, the ball was knocked out of his possession by the DB and recovered by Buffalo.
That was a catch, fumble, recovered by Buffalo. Game over.
How is it that the refs blew that play dead as an incomplete pass, but let the clearly incomplete pass go as a fumble to be overturned under review during the 4th quarter.
The refs didn’t want the play originally ruled as a fumble and reviewed, because it would have been confirmed as one, that’s why they blew it dead immediately as an incomplete pass rather than letting it play out- which they clearly should have under the NFL guidelines.