Bengals win a challenge in an unexpected way. But it should have been a booth review.

On the snow-coated field in Buffalo, as Bills running back James Cook scampers for 24 yards, he crashes the pylon with side judge David Meslow signaling touchdown.

The run was sprung by a hold at the line, so the touchdown was nullified by a penalty.

pic.twitter.com/fm4eVMLGGo

— fzclips (@fzclips) December 7, 2025

A quick view before the next snap called into question whether Cook fumbled the ball prior to going into the end zone. After the ball was made ready for play and with 14 seconds on the play clock, Bengals coach Zac Taylor dropped a challenge flag because if Cook fumbled the ball out of bounds in the end zone. If successful, Taylor could decline the offensive holding penalty and the Bengals would get the ball on a touchback.

Replay determined that Cook fumbled the ball out of bounds, but that it crossed the sideline before the pylon. Therefore there’s no touchdown, but also there’s no touchback. Since the ruling of a touchdown changed to out of bounds at the 1, Taylor would keep the acceptance of the penalty.

Since the ruling on the field — irrespective of the penalty — was changed, Taylor actually wins the challenge, even though the net result is still 10 yards from the spot of the foul in both cases. But, a deeper, more troubling aspect is that the Bengals should not have challenged the play in the first place.

Since the play was ruled a score on the field, it is a booth review only, even if the play is nullified by a penalty. It is a comprehensive look to see if there’s a reviewable element, not just a replay assist. A coach may not challenge, and in a technical sense the penalty is a loss of a challenge and a timeout, but the replay official could still review the play. The referee has discretion to not charge this penalty (which is not offset by the Bills holding penalty) if he finds the coach is legitimately confused by the call and if it’s reviewable. In the case where the replay booth didn’t initiate a review as they were supposed to, this is an absolute candidate for exercising that discretion.

In the end it is a double error, with the replay official Denise Crudup and replay assistant Brian Smith not confirming there was no reviewable element and Brad Rogers and the rest of the crew for not realizing this should not be a coach’s challenge. It nets out as no harm/no foul, but that’s not an acceptable metric when determining postseason assignments.