Blandino and Pereria weigh in

[Charlie Brown]

Oh and here is what scores of PATS FANS ARE SAYING!!!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/patriots-catch-break-jets-get-td-taken-away-controversial-call-201851701.html

 

Will yesterday

"Pats fan here. I would just like to say that the refs screwed up on that call. It was definitely a touchdown. If I was a Jets fan I would be #$%$"

or this one......

Okay yesterday

As a pat's fan, that was a bogus call. Certainly not conclusive to turn over the on the field call.

If this is what Pat Homer Fans are saying why in the world are we defending this nonsense?!!

[joewilly12]

Director of officiating defends call to reverse Seferian-Jenkins' touchdown

By Ralph Vacchiano | 12:58PM

• Share:
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

(Brad Penner)

Ralph Vacchiano | Facebook | Twitter | Archive

The decision to turn an Austin Seferian-Jenkins' touchdown on Sunday into a hard-to-explain fumble and touchback was a "clear and obvious" decision, according to the replay official who made the call.

Al Riveron, the NFL's senior VP of officiating, strongly defended his call in a conference call with reporters on Monday morning, one day after it impacted the Jets' 24-17 loss to the New England Patriots. He said the reversal of the touchdown after a video review was absolutely the correct decision based on the rule, and he didn't see anything controversial about it.

"No doubt about it, it was clear and obvious," Riveron said. "And we use that (standard) for every replay. Unless it's clear and obvious to us, we will not change the ruling on the field, and this definitely met that criteria."

It will be hard to sell that to the Jets or their fans or basically anyone who saw replays of what looked like a touchdown catch by Jets TE Austin Seferian-Jenkins in the fourth quarter. Seferian-Jenkins caught a pass from Josh McCown at the Patriots 6-yard line and barreled through two Patriots defenders and landed just inside the pylon and across the goal line. It appeared the Jets had cut their deficit to 24-21 with 8:24 to play.

But all scoring plays are automatically reviewed at the NFL's headquarters in New York, and what Riveron apparently saw was Seferian-Jenkins bobbling the ball before he got to the goal line, bobbling it a second time, and then not regaining control until he landed out of bounds. That made it a fumble that technically went out of the end zone, which meant a touchback and Patriots ball.

"Once he is going to the ground, we see the ball is loose," Riveron said. "Now we know we have a fumble. By rule, he has to re-establish possession. He must regain control of the football again. We see in two other instances where the ball is loose. He has not regained control of the football before he hits out of bounds."

The Jets were livid when the decision was announced. Receiver Jermaine Kearse called it "a B.S. call." And many - including Jets coach Todd Bowles and Riveron's predecessors, Mike Periera and Dean Blandino - questioned whether that could even be seen on the replay, or whether Riveron truly had enough video evidence to overturn the touchdown call on the field.

Riveron, said he did based on the same replays that everyone else saw on TV. "We do not have access to the in-house shots," Riveron said. "All we get here is what TV feeds us."

He got enough, he insisted, to change the call based on the existing rule. Riveron did indicate, though, that he expects the NFL's Competition Committee will revisit the rule next spring.

"This has been something that has been brought forth to the Competition Committee on numerous occasions," he said. "And I'm sure we'll talk about it again. We might not agree with the rule, but that is the rule, so the rule was enforced correctly."

[Sperm Edwards]

16 hours ago, Dcat said:

I agree that ASJ has to learn how to hold on to the ball.  And I agree that if the ball was lost (as shown in your photo) with possession not regained, then the call is fine.  However, he did regain control after that photo and before hitting the pylon. You need to show *all* the photos in presenting the case, counselor.  You are cherry picking as stated in one of the above posts.

The obvious reality is still photos don't prove established possession; they can only prove not-having possession. 

It's quite easy to show a still photo of a player with his hands on the ball, that looks like full and obvious possession in the photo, where officials said the player didn't establish control. 

Look at Monday night's overturned replay. Indy's TE fumbled, but on replay they ruled that he never had full possession, reversed the call on the field, and ruled it an incomplete pass. I would have little trouble showing you a still frame photo of the ball in his hands, and it would look like unquestionable, full possession. Or do any image search for "ruled incomplete" or some similar variation and see all the incomplete passes that appear to show more clear possession than Sunday.

I wouldn't expect you or me or any Jets fan to be happy that we didn't get the TD, and and it's that much worse because it's the cheaters, but a supposedly damning still photo simply doesn't prove possession. Establishing possession is more of a judgment call you see in motion. That's the whole premise behind "did he make a football move?" rules: it takes more than simply showing a hand (or even 2 hands) on the ball to establish controlled possession.

I'm not saying the call was incontrovertibly correct; just that I can see how it was overturned. And also it isn't a factor if he freaking holds onto it (and also that the rule, where possession changes, is total crap).

[jetrider]

20 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's very close, but I can see how it'd be overturned from these images. They see a fumble but don't see him re-establish full control until he's hit the sideline.

It sucks - particularly because it benefitted NE - but it's certainly not the worst call ever.

What they don't see can't be used to overturn the call either way. What they don't see doesn't count. They need irrefutable evidence.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, jetrider said:

What they don't see can't be used to overturn the call either way. What they don't see doesn't count. They need irrefutable evidence.

 

I don't know that that's the case. They can say they saw him fumble, and that the judgment is the ground - which is out of bounds - aided in establishing full control.

In either case the rule itself makes no sense, where the defense gains possession of the football, and it didn't make sense when we benefitted from it last year either. Even if they rule ASJ didn't re-establish control in bounds before hitting the ground, it's not like anyone on NE established possession either, and there's no opinion/judgment controversy that the last player to have possession was on offense. The rule rewards the wrong team, and the justification why is wholly insufficient.

[jack48]

On 10/15/2017 at 8:33 PM, RoadFan said:

The refs gave the Cheats a TD from the phantom PI call on Gronk. 

Then they took one away from the Jets.

Figures.  First game I allow myself to get a little emotionally invested in this season... and all I am left with is rage.

that call was a joke.  The PI was clearly Gronk pushing Adams out of the way by the helmet.  I actually hate the NFL, but I like football--so.....

[jetrider]

ESPN spent 5 minutes analyzing the play and agree they found nothing from any angle to overturn the call. They also felt at worst we should've gotten the ball at the one.

[NoBowles]

3 minutes ago, jetrider said:

ESPN spent 5 minutes analyzing the play and agree they found nothing from any angle to overturn the call. They also felt at worst we should've gotten the ball at the one.

Yes, but they did not love Idzik, so not sure if they are qualified.