Out of End Zone?

[NTXRef]

TD or not?
[yt=425,350]_joIui25KAI[/yt]

[The Ref Thats Lef]

In my view TD. (Nice discussion point though)

[NTXRef]

In my view TD. (Nice discussion point though)

I agree.   This is so rare, it's good to get an example of it.

[Osric Pureheart]

Provided he held onto the ball while he was being held (it seems to have come out at some point, which my educated guess says happened as he contacted the ground), TD here as well.

[110]

Canadian rules provide for a one-foot-inbounds possession philosophy, with the proviso that a player can be awarded an inbounds possession if a defender's force/impact caused the player to go out of bounds when otherwise he would have been inbounds.

Or, less wordily: 

[MJT]

Carried out = TD.  Nice call!

[Welpe]

Good call! 

[foureyedzebra]

4-1-3-p

2-2-7-e

Does the ball becoming dead because of 4-1-3-p nullify the fact that 2-2-7-e rules this as a no catch?

[NVFOA_Ump]

Does the ball becoming dead because of 4-1-3-p nullify the fact that 2-2-7-e rules this as a no catch?

No nullification needed - by rule the ball is dead if the calling official decides that 4-1-3-p applies and the airborne pass receiver has been held and subsequently carried so that he is prevented from immediately returning to the ground.  What happens after the ball is dead is immaterial.

[Morningrise]

4-1-3-p

2-2-7-e

Does the ball becoming dead because of 4-1-3-p nullify the fact that 2-2-7-e rules this as a no catch?

I think so, especially given recent philosophical guidance. A player must maintain control if he goes to the ground in the process of making the catch. But if the defender is preventing him from returning to the ground, then how can he also be "going to the ground" at the same time?

[foureyedzebra]

I think so, especially given recent philosophical guidance. A player must maintain control if he goes to the ground in the process of making the catch. But if the defender is preventing him from returning to the ground, then how can he also be "going to the ground" at the same time?

Makes perfect sense. I was having trouble with ruling this as a catch when he did not maintain conrol as he went to the ground. The defender prevented him from going to the ground in the process of making the catch. Rule 4-1-3-p causes the ball to become dead and the catch to be completed. As NVFOA_Ump stated. "What happens after the ball is dead is immaterial."