On the second 'Riders challenge, if they had ruled that it was a catch and then fumble, who would have had possession, and where? This is not to debate whether or not they got the call right, I'm just curious what the ruling would have been.
For those who didn't see it, the ball was caught (maybe) just before the goal line, then stripped just before the receiver's foot touched the goal line. The pass was ruled incomplete (they claimed he didn't have possession). The 'Riders challenged, saying that it was a catch. If it was challenged successfully and ruled a catch, the refs then would have been in the awkward position of trying to determine if he was stripped of the ball before the goal line, or if the ball had broken the plane. In my opinion, it was impossible to tell where the ball was when it was stripped (his foot wasn't across, but from one angle it looked like he was leaning forward, so the ball might have been across).
a) rule it a touchdown (it might have broken the plane);
b) rule it a fumble (it might not have broken the plane); or
c) rule it a catch and give it to the 'Riders at the 1, because the catch was certain (if it had been ruled a catch), but the moment of the fumble wasn't.
My vote is c, but I'm curious how they would have addressed that. Purely a hypothetical question - it didn't matter much at that point of the game anyway - but I'm curious.