Is the a brilliant move or a blunder

Ok, chess.com says it’s a blunder but I don’t believe them. Look at move 24 to the end. It’s says I blundered by rook I but think it’s a brilliant sac. My brother disagrees and says it’s a blunder, so please tell me to end this dispute 

Seems to me that because your opponent blundered after you blundered, it worked out well for you.

I would have taken your pawn on f2 or your rook on h8.  Most likely the pawn.

That looks like your opponent making a giant blunder making your rook blunder look like a sacrifice in my opinion. Also, they weren't forced to take. Maybe why it was a blunder.

Oh I just realized the rook on h8 could have been taken by the bishop on e5, winning a rook and creating a giant advantage.

Just because one line works out in your favor doesn't mean that it's a good move. Here, your opponent could've captured your rook on h8 and then you would've had very little counterplay. It's a nice trap, but the best engine won't fall for it.

However, I'm curious. In move 12 of this game, why was I not awarded the "brilliant" move? https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/73704000715?tab=review

Bishop takes rook
Pawn takes rook, queen
Rook takes queen (fmr pawn)

Yeah mb. I’m not very smart tbh

It's a blunder because your rook on h8 is undefended, and if they were to take they would be completely winning, and the definition of a blunder on chess.com is 'a move that gives you a losing position'. A brilliant move is a hard to find move that is the best move and gives you a winning position, and losing your rook on h8, hoping your opponent will blunder mate in 1 is not a brilliant move, it is just hope chess.

We liget had a conversation in the real world about this. You don’t need to explain it again. I understood you the first time bozo