The Minkah Theft - Question?

[Shaw66]

I agree that at worst it's an INT and fumble, but I don't think that would have been the correct call.  

 

Watching the end zone view, the ball lands in Davis's right hand.  He carries it briefly and then his left also grasps the ball, at about the same time as Fitzpatrick's right hand lands on the ball.  Gabriel's left hand never left the ball, and if his right hand came off the ball, it was only for an instant.   That is, from the time Davis first touched the ball, he never lost possession of it.   Minkah may have gotten two arms around it, but Davis never let go.  Both guys had possession, and the play continued until either (1) they went down, (2) they went out of bounds, or (3) one got clear possession.  Clear possession is what happened.   Reception.  For sure.  

[LeGOATski]

Yeah...anyone arguing that call is just a bitter Steelers fan

[unbillievable]

It was pass interference by Minkah...

a catch by Davis,...

strip fumble by Minkah, but...

ended with strip fumble to Davis.

Somewhere in there, they could have called holding or roughing the passer.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

Very embarrassing for Minka Fitzpatrick if he had established enough control for possession to then have it ripped out of his grip by Davis.

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

I thought for sure they'd challenge it as it looked like Fitzpatrick had sole possession as they stepped into the endzone.   I'd think that would make it a touch back as soon as the ball went over the goal line and anything Davis did after that point wouldnt matter.   

 

 

He absolutely did not have sole possession. I don't think he ever had full possession.

 

 

2 hours ago, Last Guy on the Bench said:

I've seen a few people online and on TV kvetching about the length of time Fitzpatrick seemed to have possession of Gabe's 2nd TD before Gabe ripped it back. Their argument is that Fitzpatrick had already intercepted it fully and it should have been ruled accordingly. I was wondering about this live, while I nervously waited for the extra point to be kicked before a red flag could be thrown.

 

But then I thought about it more. Even if Fitzpatrick had it and it was an interception, the ball is still live. If a defender has a ball in the end zone, it is live until he is tackled or gives himself up, right? Totally different than an offensive player - if an offensive player has or establishes full possession in the end zone, it's a TD and the play is over. But if a defender picks it and starts running around back there, an offensive player can still strip him of the ball and it's live. So seems to me that at worst, that play is an interception and then a fumble in the end zone recovered for a touchdown by Davis. Am I crazy? The one counterargument I can see is if Fitzpatrick had possession and they ruled he was down by forward progress - but that would be whack - he wasn't being pushed "backwards" - he was running full speed in that direction.

 

In any case. I don't think Minkah every really established full possession in the first place - they were wrestling for it, and Gabe won. But either way, it's a TD to my thinking.

 

Also, the reason Gabe caught it one-handed is that he had to because Minkah was holding his other arm - so it could also have been Pass Interference.

 

Strange and exhilarating play. Just want to make sure my reasoning is correct if I start arguing with a whiner.

 

 

Looked to me that Fitzpatrick wasn't holding Gabe's arm, only pressed against him trapping it by keeping his arm and body between the arm and the ball. Defenders are coached to do that and refs allow it.

 

I think you're right that Minkah had gotten primary possession but never full or complete possession.

 

Great play by Davis.

[Captain Caveman]

2 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

I thought for sure they'd challenge it as it looked like Fitzpatrick had sole possession as they stepped into the endzone.   I'd think that would make it a touch back as soon as the ball went over the goal line and anything Davis did after that point wouldnt matter.   

Have you never seen a defender run the ball out of the end zone?  It's not a touchback unless Fitzpatrick goes down or gives himself up, and he can't give himself up because Gabe Davis is holding on to the ball.

[dbmu1977]

Gabe never took his hands off the ball, if he had it would have been an int. 

 

So, so happy to have Mr Davis back and functioning at an all pro level. If the Bills get everyone back healthy by the playoffs, they were tough to beat.

 

Go Bills .......Yeah Baby!

[Beck Water]

45 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

Very embarrassing for Minka Fitzpatrick if he had established enough control for possession to then have it ripped out of his grip by Davis.

 

I promise you, he was very embarrassed watching film today. 

 

As was whichever Steelers receiver had a clean catch followed by having the ball smashed out by Taron Johnson. (Edit: that was Deonte Johnson.  Johnson on Johnson crime!)

 

Whoever that was Stefon Diggs stiffarmed is probably getting his due share.  Diggs looked like the Mighty Thor there, and as though there must be a trick to it, and he's been studying that trick with Allen for the last month.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Beck Water

[PromoTheRobot]

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Charles Romes said:

Even if Minkah didn’t let go Bills would get the TD under the simultaneous possession rule.  This came up 5-7 years ago in a Green Bay game I believe where the receiver kind of grabbed on to the ball after it was intercepted and was awarded the TD. 
 

 

Yeah it was in a Russell Wilson’s first-ever Monday Night game as a rookie. 

Edited October 10, 2022 by Doc

[John from Riverside]

Tie goes to the receiver

[Doc]

At best it might have been called an INT and then (technically) a fumble.  But was really a contested catch that Gabe wrestled away from him.

[MPT]

6 hours ago, Rocky Landing said:

The Tyler Kroft fiasco was one of the first things I thought of. But IIRC, the NFL stated a couple days later that it should have been ruled a catch by Kroft? Or am I making that up in my head...?

 

EDIT:

I just looked it up, and I was making it up in my head:

 

 

That call still infuriates me. Kroft had initial control, it was simultaneous as they went to the ground (which goes to the offense) and Kroft ripped the ball away while they were down. At what point could the Rams' defender ever have had control of the ball?

[cba fan]

7 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

It could not have been a fumble as the ball never hit the ground.

FYI: if you pull ball out of players hand it is ruled a fumble and turnover. FYI #2. Happened in Bears Vikings game yesterday at end to seal win for Vikes.

 

FYI #3. also, if ball carrier has ball, then loses ball up in air and defender catches it in air it is also a fumble. ty.

 

Edited October 11, 2022 by cba fan

[Billl]

It’s one of those plays where even if you could technically rule that to be an INT, common sense says it’s a TD.

[Alphadawg7]

Doesn't matter...if Minkah had intercepted the pass the ball is still live until he takes a knee or gets tackled.  Meaning any player could rip it out of his had which would be an instant TD

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, Billl said:

It’s one of those plays where even if you could technically rule that to be an INT, common sense says it’s a TD.

 

There is no way you could technically rule that an INT. At no point did Fitzpatrick establish sole possession and simultaneous possession remains with the offense.

 

This is a non-story.

8 hours ago, Doc said:

Yeah it was in a Russell Wilson’s first-ever Monday Night game as a rookie. 

 

With replacement refs

[Matt_In_NH]

I had the thought when I saw the replay from the end zone but worked through in

y head exactly what the op did.  He did not have it long enough to establish possession.  And if he had it’s still a bills td with int fumble.    But he did not.  

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

Short answer is yes

[thronethinker]

14 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

I thought for sure they'd challenge it as it looked like Fitzpatrick had sole possession as they stepped into the endzone.   I'd think that would make it a touch back as soon as the ball went over the goal line and anything Davis did after that point wouldnt matter.   

It was a TD, it is automatically reviewed and confirmed by the league. There is nothing to challenge.