Yea, I know thats what the rule states, but in my mind a TD catch in the end zone is defined as having controlled possession when his feet come down in bounds, at that point the play is dead and it's a TD. But by rule it's basically all of that AND maintaining control through the tackle or going down or throughout the act of going out of bounds, only then is the play over. It's as if the play is not over in the end zone until the player is down or out of bounds, again that's only in the end zone. The end zone seems to have different criteria than the field of play in certain instances. That's what I'm getting at, I'm probably explaining piss poorly.
I agree with you. I think that scoring a TD, catching the ball in the end zone, is considered "an act common to the game" which Gilbert didn't perform on the non-interception.