Commentators were saying that as long as he had control of the ball it's still out, even if the ball was touching the ground
Um no. That's commentators not knowing the laws. If any part of the ball touches the ground at any time during the process of catching it, it's not out.
The
hand can be touching the ground, but not the ball.
33.1 Out Caught
The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his/her bat without having previously been in contact with any fielder, and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch, as described in 33.2 and 33.3,
before it touches the ground.
33.2.2 Furthermore, a catch will be fair if any of the following conditions applies:
33.2.2.1 the ball is held in the hand or hands of a fielder, even if the hand holding the ball is touching the ground, or is hugged to the body, or lodges in the external protective equipment worn by a fielder, or lodges accidentally in a fielder’s clothing.
[my bold]
ETA:
Reading cricinfo, it appears to be Ricky Ponting who is a bit confused. No way the ball was under control then it touched the ground, as he is suggesting was the umpire's decision. We also have a problem here with the limits of technology - the most relevant moment to the decision can occur between frames.