Sarah Nolie

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@NathanSerious I think it’s a weird play. For the cb to get an int by stealing a ball from the hands of a wr already on the ground is a first in the nfl. Also, the play should of been still a live ball then because the cb was never down by contact.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@TimContic He didn’t catch it, he stole it which is a weird way to get an int at the end of the day. Especially when he stole when the wr was already on the ground. Never seen that before.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@ThirstRoundPick If that’s the case, the cb was also not down and that play should of been still a live ball.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@hbtCHIEFS Mcmillian didn’t catch it though, he stole it when the player had it on the ground. I do think it was still an int. Cooks needed to complete the roll or hold onto the ball for like .5 seconds longer.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@chriswallace @4WhomJBellTolls I think if he completes the roll or holds for like .5 seconds longer it would be a catch.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@58DLR @Boisabronco He did lose possession when is whole back was already on the ground and there was a point in time they both had possession. I still think he needed to hold on for like .5 seconds longer, then it would of been a catch.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@MattyCanniz @ItsJust__E This play the wr is never down. Cooks was down with possession, then there was a point they both had it and were down, and then he finally ripped all the way.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@UNC121168 @harrisonpkent @NFL_DovKleiman I think it’s correct bc cb stole the ball before cooks finished his roll. Have to complete the roll.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@UncleTravis4 @NFL_DovKleiman I agree cooks needed to hold on for like .5 more seconds or compete the roll. He did have possession and was technically down but he didn’t have it for long enough.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@DeadmanBostonB @NFL_DovKleiman Yea full speed looks like an int but I think that’s the point of replay to see what really happened. Still think he needed to hold on for like .5 more seconds or complete the roll.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@harrisonpkent @NFL_DovKleiman It looks pretty clear here he had possession but I still think it’s an int bc cooks didn’t complete the roll. I think if he would of held on for like .5 more seconds, it would of been a catch.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@Dougie_AXP @JoeGoodberry @JFC9er4lif1 Yes. Also very difficult for cooks to hold on when he had possession of ball on his back in the middle of roll while cb was on top of him with momentum to do steal the ball using his own roll. Just a weird play. If called a catch, I think they would of kept it.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@Dougie_AXP @JoeGoodberry @JFC9er4lif1 Yea I agree and I think even if he completed one roll and it was stolen, still an int. I think he needed to complete 2 or 3 rolls and then he would of been fine.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@MeikrantzSkyler @LJTranslator Yea if cooks just held on for like .5 seconds longer or completed the roll, I think they rule it a catch.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@MichaelJDidion @SnapFlow69 If he just completed the roll, I think it would be a catch. Crazy that completing a roll is even a thing though.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@Nate_Knows_Ball Yea I think if he would of completed the roll, he would of been fine. Crazy that completing a roll is even a thing.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@JoeGoodberry @JFC9er4lif1 Cooks had possession but according to this rules official, you have to complete the roll which cooks did not. Lol, I didn’t know completing a roll was a thing.

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@kurt13warner How long does it take to survive the ground? If cooks didn’t get it stolen for a second later, would the catch be good? Also, even though he had knee down and was touched, if he held onto ball, could he get up and run for more yards?

[Sarah Nolie @snb5463]

@_bbrandonn_ @TheBillsGuys Hurts to lose on the first interception in nfl history where a player caught the ball, fell to the ground, and then had it stolen.