OSU Clemson Game Clemson "Fumble" In End-Zone

[FeetballRef]

I am a HS official & don't know NCAA Rules.  The Clemson player jumped in and possessed the ball and return to the ground with both feet.  OSU player then punched the ball out and it was recovered in the air and OSU advanced the ball from the end-zone to ~20 yard line.  It was ruled a fumble. If it was a fumble, the player must have completed all of the requirements for a catch & ball should have been dead with a 6 point score.   If the pass hadn't been completed, then the "intercepted" pass by OSU would have made sense.  Could some one explain how the NCAA rules on a catch in the end-zone are defined?  Regards...

[JasonTX]

I would like to see the play if anyone could post a video.

A tip for terminology with NCAA:  A catch indicates the ball never hits the ground.  Recovery indicates the ball has touched the ground.  So, in your description you'd want to phrase that as the "fumble was caught after it was punched out". 

As to the answer to your question.  A catch in the end zone is no different than in the field of play.  If they ruled a fumble then I would agree that would indicate the catch was completed and at that point it should be a TD.  It's impossible for team A to fumble the ball if the pass is complete in the opponents end zone.

[Legacy Zebra]

It was not ruled a fumble. It was ruled an interception. The Team A player controlled the pass in the air, but did not maintain control long enough after returning to the ground to establish possession. A Team B player caught the ball (which was still a forward pass, not a fumble) for the interception. Simply touching the ground with control is not enough to have possession. The player must maintain control long enough to perform an act common to the game AND survive contact with the ground. He did neither of those things. If Team B had not caught the ball, it would have been an incomplete pass.

[HLinNC]

NCAA has a more stringent definition of a catch than NFHS.

It tends to lead to interesting arguments with the guys who work both.

[Grant - AR]

Here’s a link to the play.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lwFAQ3TTh54

[JasonTX]

Here’s a link to the play.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lwFAQ3TTh54

Definitely not a "catch / fumble". 

[bossman72]

Too quick to give him the TD.  Interception at all levels.

[Kalle]

These are easy in replay, IMO. Just think what the ruling would have been if the ball was not caught by anybody. I think in this case 100% of the NCAA(-ish) officials would say "incomplete pass" and 0% would say "touchdown". Also this was confirmed by replay as an obviously correct call as they did not think it warranted a longer look (as I understand the review rules, this type of touchdown/interception call is reviewable).

[zebrastripes]

In my high school games this is an interception if I have anything to say about it.

[AlUpstateNY]

Too quick to give him the TD.  Interception at all levels.

NFHS definition of a catch requires possession (which appears clear while airborne, maintained though touching the ground, inbounds), at which INSTANT completes a TD. There is no "interval" requirement in the NFHS code, either he was judged to have maintained possession, when touching inbounds (EZ), or not.

[NVFOA_Ump]

NFHS definition of a catch requires possession (which appears clear while airborne, maintained though touching the ground, inbounds), at which INSTANT completes a TD. There is no "interval" requirement in the NFHS code, either he was judged to have maintained possession, when touching inbounds (EZ), or not.

So if that first "catch" occurred in the middle of the field at the twenty yard line and the loose ball hit the ground you would have ruled it a fumble?