Then why the hell didn't they review the one where it appeared the ball may have hit the ground? Why do the standard rules never apply when it's the Jets? If the goddamn rule is to review all turnovers, then review all turnovers. Piss poor officiating as always. And to make it even more of a joke they instantly review the Holmes catch because it's under 2 minutes, yet don't even review the pick which they are supposed to review and just let it go like that.
There's no rule to review all turnovers you douche. Mandatory reviews only apply to scoring plays and it is at the discretion of the replay assistant under 2 mins.
What the hell are you talking about? They review turnovers just like scoring plays. This started last year where have you been? Also calling the guy a douche is beyond unnecessary. And it only makes it worse that you are completely wrong.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7747023/nfl-owners-ok-review-turnovers-ot-tweak Come out of the cave and enjoy this benefit of civilization called Internet.
The interception was reviewed and deemed good. I understand that he's a rookie but he's been playing like shit these last 4 games. We need to see something from him, what we need to see is him making progress and looking like a better QB now than he did earlier in the season. Instead he's going backwards, he actually looks worse. Myself and other Jets fans are sick of rooting for mediocre QB's; we're sick of waiting for a guy to take the next step, it's frustrating. I hope Geno gets it together real soon and if not we may have to waste yet another draft pick on a QB smh.
Isn't it funny they don't look at that but they look at the Holmes play which was almost the same play? both hit the ground and should have been overturned.
They take a quick look to determine if the ref should go under the hood, that was clearly close enough(as it DID hit the ground) that it should have been looked at.
all TOs are to be reviewed but not all go under the hood. an official upstairs makes the call whether the ref on the field should go under the hood. Clearly he should have but they made a mistake and we got screwed b/c of it. It's not why we lost but it is still frustrating.
not sure if the OP is the bigger douche or the guy that called him a douche and didn't know the rules. Its a toss-up. BUt its a moronic thread ( Barcs being Barcs)
^I was asking a direct question about why the play wasn't thoroughly reviewed, not looking for excuses for the loss. Take your one dimensional mind out of this thread if you're just going to insult me. These idiot responses, that wasn't the point of the thread. I'm not blaming the loss on the refs. I love how people always dismiss things on here without even addressing the content. I'm referring to the one specific play where it looked like the INT hit the ground. The announcers caught it at the last second and said the Jets should challenge, but all turnovers are supposed to be reviewed if there's even a chance that it's close. That appeared to be selective enforcement of that particular rule. I'm just wondering why.
With all 'scoring plays' being reviewed, the Jets offense gave the review officials a day off yesterday
When? It wasn't given nearly the same scrutiny as the Holmes and other plays that were reviewed. There was barely even a delay of the game at all. By the time they showed us the replay, the Bills had already snapped it making it too late. If they did indeed review it, they did it very quickly instead of scrutinizing. It pretty much defeats the purpose of reviewing all turnovers. If it's close you have to go under the hood. :lol: at all these alleged Jets fans personally insulting me over a question!!! Some people need to grow up I guess.
Turnovers and TDs are reviewed off-site. As soon as one of the two happens, they start reviewing it. Just because we didn't have enough time to see a replay thanks to the announcers chit-chatting doesn't mean it wasn't reviewed.
On the Holmes play, we called a TO after the play, which gave the replay booth time to review the catch and notify the ref. Chances are that if we run up to the line and spike it, it would not have been reviewed.
