KO OOB Play (LSU-FL) Video
 

Video of the much discussed KO OOB play from the LSU-Florida game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUHdx6KVAQA

News Flash
 

Announcers are idiots.

Hard to tell but looks like the ball might have been possessed before the returner stepped out of bounds.

Did the left foot come down prior to the right foot. I could not tell.

Good pickup as that is apparently what did happen. And if it did, this would NOT be a KO OOB as it was touched by an inbounds player before he went OOB

Not according to NCAA rules.
The officials got it right.

What NCAA rule are you referring to? If it is the recent AR about an airborne player possessing the ball and landing OOB it does not apply if you judge his left foot came down inbounds first

That is the rule. The player was in the act of catching the ball and in doing so landed out of bounds. It is just that simple.

How is he "in the act of catching" when his foot touches inbounds thereby completing the catch?

What does "one foot in bounds" have to do with fielding a free kick? This is not a forward pass. The officials on the field called it out of bounds and the call was upheld upon review.

I was quoting YOU in case you missed it.

What does the call on the field have to do with our view of the video and discussion of the play?

I saw the player possess (or as you would say "catch") the kick in the field of play and then step out of bounds. How do others see this video?

That rule applies to an airborne player who lands first OOB. It does not address one who lands with a left foot down in bounds before hs right foot comes down OOB.

In the act of catching, he "touched" I hope you will agree? And if he "touched" while his left foot was on the ground inbounds, even if his right foot then touched OOB, would you not agree it was touched by B before going OOB?

No, i would rule that he caught the ball out of bounds, since one foot was out of bounds, even if it did not touch in unison with his other foot. Why is this so hard to understand? The officials had no problem seeing it that way.

It does not matter where the ball was "caught" It matters what the status of the player was when he was "touching" the ball. And if he had one foot inbounds and nothing touching out of bounds, he was INBOUNDS. And if he was INBOUNDS and TOUCHING the ball, there can be NO fould for kick OOB

Seems yours is a minority opinion.
In light of what actually happened I wonder how you will explain it if you call it that way.

My guess is that replay will change it.

Do you even know the NCAA rules?