My question has to do with the scoop and score call.

The rules expert on the broadcast—whose name I forget—did assert right away that he thought the call would be overturned because the receiver hadn’t made “a football move” after catching the ball and before it was stripped.  (At least that’s what I thought he said.)

So, my question is: if the Clemson player had made the same play by the sideline and had come down with the ball with his first foot clearly in bounds—and with the rest of the action happening out of bounds, would it have been ruled a legal catch?  (I mean, what kind of football move could someone possibly try to make once they have stepped out of bounds?)

And, if so, does that mean there is a different standard for making a catch in the middle of the field and one by the sideline (which would make no sense to me if true)?

I’m not trying to be snarky here.  I am just perplexed as to why that was not deemed a legitimate reception and why the TV expert was so sure right away it would be reversed.  Thanks.

PS—if there should be a different standard for a catch at the sidelines, then in my humble opinion that inconsistency should be changed.