Every week I listen to these two candy-asses on PFT to see how they can spin things to make the Birds seem less than they are and I was still baffled by this take around 10 minutes in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU9CV4C453A
While watching the game, albeit through a biased lens, I didn’t think for a second that this was a catch and fumble as it was clearly what they’ve always called a “bang-bang” play in the past. He didn’t really make a move up field and I feel like the the actual duration of possession for a catch needs to be more than a fraction of a second. I get that there are criteria defining the number of steps, etc. and you can closely examine all that in slow motion, but I think it should be common sense for anyone watching in real time to see that this was a drop. Do ya’s disagree?
Nah he never had control
in real time i thought it was, and if they had called it a fumble instead of an incomplete, i bet the ruling would have stood if challenged.
Move on
Making this argument with stills is absurd. It puts their entire argument in question.
Borderline. It can be called either way, but you go with the call on the field in that scenario.
Even in slow-mo, it didn’t look like he ever had complete control of the ball