Todd Bowles: I don’t give “two shakes” about replay decision

Getty Images

Aside from Patriots fans, NFL head of officiating Al Riveron doesn’t have many people siding with him in his decision to overturn a Jets touchdown and award the ball to New England on Sunday. Riveron defended his replay ruling Monday.

Jets coach Todd Bowles, though, refused to fuel the controversy.

“I don’t give two shakes about it,” Bowles said Monday, via Rich Cimini of ESPN. “. . . That wasn’t the reason we lost the game. We’ve moved on from that. It doesn’t change. We’re not going to cry about it all week. We have to go play Miami.”

Riveron ruled Jets tight end Austin Seferian-Jenkins fumbled the ball before crossing the goal line, and then failed to control it again until after the ball had traveled across the goal line and out of bounds. Former heads of officiating Dean Blandino and Mike Pereira are among those who believe Riveron got it wrong.

Bowles made it clear he’s done talking about it.

“It’s not going to change, so it really doesn’t matter,” Bowles said, via Ralph Vacchiano of SNY. “It’s not worth talking about to me.”

39 responses to “Todd Bowles: I don’t give “two shakes” about replay decision

  1. I’m a Patriots fan and think the call should not have been overturned. I’d feel the same way if it had been ruled not a TD on the field. I also think more gets made of it because it’s the Patriots. I also think Bowles is doing a very good job with the roster he’s got.

  2. Ridiculous call, IMO. While it could have been called either way by the official on the field (given the verbiage of the rule), there’s no way incontrovertible evidence existed anywhere on the replay such that the ruling could be overturned. The Jets were robbed of TD, and everyone was robbed of what could have been an exciting finish to that game. The Jets showed up to play, and hopefully the next meeting will be just as competitive.

    -NE fan.

  3. Ball is out in the photo above. We all know he lands on the pylon.

    This is not as obvious as many seem to make it. I get why fans are upset. But an argument can be made the call was correct too. Being objective, the photo above and where he lands are two big details that lead to the final call.

    I totally understand the other side of the argument.

  4. How many times does it take for fans of the teams losing to the Pats to realize they are just better? They’ll just never get it.

  5. It just figures once again that the pats got a ruling in there favor! In my opinion it was a touch down. Could have changed the game. Oh well.

  6. skawh says:
    October 16, 2017 at 4:34 pm

    How many times does it take Pat’s being gifted a win before one realizes the fix is in?
    ==================================
    Even with the TD the Jets are 3 points behind with 5+ min to play. Sigh….

  7. skawh says:
    October 16, 2017 at 4:34 pm
    How many times does it take Pat’s being gifted a win before one realizes the fix is in?

    ——————————————————————————————-

    Yes it was a bad call. But don’t forget the Jets allowed the Patriots to score 24 unanswered points. This included a TD right before the half when the Patriots moved the ball over 60 yards in under 70 seconds.

  8. I read about the call before I saw it on TV.

    imho, foust was pretty decided it was a TD before he saw even first replay. After that it was confirmation bias.

    Also Foust seemed to be using the interpretation for what is a good catch versus what is a fumble… he kept citing the catch language regarding “regaining control of the ball” (after one has already cross the goal line). The league comment made it pretty clear this was incorrect, that he fumbled before he entered. It has nothing to do with whether he maintained control out of bounds, that is a catch-definition consideration, here he had already made the catch and was acting a runner.

    Point being, if you fumble out of the end-zone but then get control out of bounds even if the ball never touches out of bounds, it’s still a fumble and it’s still out of bounds even if the ball and you crossed the goal line. must have control entering the end-zone.

    Poor commentary insofar as reading the text of the rule especially in regard to proper context. Foust kept piling on without ever considering how he might be wrong.

  9. Bowles is right to say this, of course. He can’t fix the replay. But he can work on getting rid of bad penalties by his players and on getting McCown to throw less picks. There were several factors that undermined the Jets yesterday, and that bad call didn’t kill the Jets’ chances by itself.

    In other words, on to Miami (which, surprise surprise, might be a good game).

  10. skawh says:
    October 16, 2017 at 4:34 pm
    How many times does it take Pat’s being gifted a win before one realizes the fix is in?

    Really! The fix is in! Go back and look at the Tyree helmet catch again, Not only way ELi “in the Grasp” there were a half dozen holding calls and 5 Hand to the face Penalties not called on a play that would have probably sealed the Undefeated season! You think they fixed a game for the Pats in early October…Let it go!

  11. The ball was clearly out of his hands. The question then becomes did he retain control? Hard to say. Call could go either way on replay as well.

    Either way, they were still going to be down with 5 minutes to play.

  12. This could have been a “make-up call” by refs for neglecting to call obvious pass interference on the Jets multiple times.

  13. ASJ said that he should have held on to the ball and that he let his team down. Now Bowles is saying let’s move on. Even the Jets are tired of this. Let it go.

  14. I don’t believe for a second the refs gave any thought to helping the Pats. I DO believe they blew the call and I think it’s obvious. The ref on the field called it a TD. I can’t see how they saw enough to overturn it. There is no rule that says how tight you have to hold the ball and he never lost control.

    Oh well, on to next week.

  15. I did not know this rule before the play, but it sure seemed like Malcom Butler did as he was adamant that the ball was out and, according to Matthew Slater, told Patriot players on the sideline that it should be a touchback before the replay review decision was announced.

  16. More often than not, no call is the right call. The guys working the replay should have let the call on the field stand. Of course, Austin Seferian-Jenkins could have held on to the ball.

  17. leftlaneisforpassingonly says:
    October 16, 2017 at 6:00 pm
    More often than not, no call is the right call. The guys working the replay should have let the call on the field stand. Of course, Austin Seferian-Jenkins could have held on to the ball.
    —————————
    If a player doesn’t hold on to the ball, it’s a fumble. Sort of the point here…

  18. I think we can agree that he did not have control when he crossed the goal line. What the officials say is that he regained control when out of bounds. No TD.

  19. audio2sell says:
    .
    The ball was clearly out of his hands. The question then becomes did he retain control? Hard to say.
    ===================================================

    And since it’s hard to say, IE inconclusive, the call should not have been overturned.

  20. The ball is clearly out but I would have given the Jets the ball at the one yard line instead since you can make the argument either way. This rule will not last much longer if it keeps happening as much as it has been this season.

  21. Tough break for the Jets but the rule came in to stop offensive ball carriers held up near the corner of the goal line near the end of a game from deliberately fumbling into the end zone in the hope a team mate might fall on it. Because if no one did there was still a chance the ball went out the end zone anyway and the offense would (having abused the spirit of the rules) still get the ball back. The rule has to stay but it could/should be tweaked.

  22. If that happened to the Patriots, I would have been pretty upset. It appears that the rule was called correctly, but it is a very harsh penalty considering their was no intent to use the fumble for the players teams advantage. Having said that, the Pats have been on the losing end of many bad calls that have cost them games ( not a sure thing that was the case here ).To suggest that any NFL employee wants to help the Pats win is absurd. Does anyone remember Deflategate? Please….

  23. soon, the NFL’s only audience maybe lawyers. let them have fun discussing the rules and what a “Catch” is and what “posession” is.

  24. funny about malcolm butler making the case for lost possession. multiple times this season i have seen pats players make a case to the refs and get their way. rarely do i see this with other teams, even when the players are correct.

  25. audio2sell says:

    Either way, they were still going to be down with 5 minutes to play.

    ——

    Actually, there were 8.5 minutes left to play. And they would have only been down 3 points.

  26. So this is now going to be ‘the standard’ for whether a catch is a catch?$&@”/%#!!!

    I thought after the whole Dez Bryant mess it was established that holding onto the ball ‘through to the ground’ was now the standard??????????????????????????????

    This opens up a whole can of worms if now a established catch then a little bobble then regaining control just before or even while going out of bounds now constitutes a fumble even though player holds onto ball to ground. So so ridiculous!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Such a frustrating thing this NFL officiating inconsistency. They have crossed the line with this replay system and now its a monster out of control. Since when did officiating become the game vs remaining transparent to the teams playing the game?

    I guess Riveron has now made his mark and the madness will continue!!!!!!

    Sick

  27. audio2sell says:
    .
    The ball was clearly out of his hands. The question then becomes did he retain control? Hard to say.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++

    Hard to say???? What are you watching?????

    Seferin holds onto the ball through to the ground and stands up with it at the end of the play!!!! The ball never touches the ground as in what the catch rule standard has been up to now!!!

    This is insane!!!!

    Established catches with bobbles going out of bounds (even though in this case he clearly secures it before going out) now constitute a fumble???? God help us!!!!!!

  28. Whether the review made it right or not (I’m in the “made it right” camp), the rule is a really bad one. Any ball that is fumbled and goes out of bounds un-recovered by either team should be returned to the offense at the point of the fumble. Whether that “out of bounds” happens to be the side or back of the end zone should not matter.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!