I should point out that I don't know exactly what the rule in this situation is, but I still want to give some reasons I feel that was an INT: There was simply NO clear and obvious evidence that the football touched the ground. Zooming in it was far to pixelated to actually see the football touch the ground at ANY point in that motion. Assuming that it did and overturning a call was a poor, poor decision. The play should have stood (not confirmed, just stood). IF Avant holds onto the ball, he gets credited with a catch, whether the football touched or not. This is where I don't know exactly what the rule says, but I do know that if he controls it, it counts as a catch, touch or no touch on the ground. This is unfairly biased to the offense (surprise surprise), but it was clear he had a hand under it and was in the process of catching it. If the hand-under rule is enough for a catch, then it should apply to the interception as well.