Catch?

[Spence]

Originally Posted by maven

Well, yes and no. If the official had ruled that he had possession, then he would have ruled it a catch. Being on the ground inbounds is part of the definition of a catch, so that is a relevant point. 2-4-1

But it's official's judgment whether he had possession. I guess you thought he did; apparently the official disagreed.

Philosophy on this play has evolved over the years, and a receiver must generally retain possession through immediate contact with the ground or an opponent.

I didn't see the play. It came up on a board. Someone said "by rule" it should have been a catch since his knee was down and there was possession even if for a split second.

Figured I'd go check to see if the "by rule" guy was right.