The ground can indeed cause a fumble. If the fumble is preceded by a stumble. And/or if the fumble is not followed by an officiating bumble.

That’s the takeaway from the stunning turnaround in Sunday’s Jaguars-Eagles game, which went from 22-0 to 22-16 in the blink of an eye.

After the Jaguars scored their first points of the day, the officials ruled that Barkley fumbled after hitting the ground. The ruling on the field was upheld via replay review.

Here’s the play.

NFL V.P. of instant replay Mark Butterworth explained the decision in a pool report after the game, which the Eagles barely held on to win. Basically, why wasn’t Barkley down by contact before the ball came out?

“On that play, the running back was touched by a defensive player, number 51, and then he did have contact with number 69 on the offense,” Butterworth said. “It was deemed a stumble on the field, so because it was a stumble, when he went down, he would not be down by contact and therefore it was a fumble.”

What would have made Barkley down by contact?

“If no other player hit him and they ruled it not a stumble, and he went down after contact by number 51 of the defense with no other contact and he went immediately down, then he would be down by contact,” Butterworth said.

That’s a tough sell. The better explanation would have included a reminder of the replay standard. The video evidence must be clear and obvious that the ruling on the field was incorrect. It wasn’t clear and obvious that the on-field officials erred by ruling that Barkley wasn’t down by contact when he fumbled.

Even then, it’s a tough sell. There was contact, and Barkley fell. And the ball came out. And if feels like it shouldn’t have been a fumble.

The good news is that the Eagles still won. The bad news is that the Eagles failed to cover the spread. Given the extent to which the NFL is stuffing its pockets with gambling money, the NFL needs to be just as concerned about the latter as it should be about the former.