|
Unless I'm way off base, the determining factor in whether a play is reviewable in cases like this is when the whistle blew. If a play is blown dead because an official believed that the runner was down by contact, and a review shows that he lost possession before going down, it's a near certainty that the whistle blew while the ball was loose. If the original ruling is overturned, we then have an inadvertent whistle, and (I'm assuming this is the case in the NFL) the ball would be awarded to the team that last possessed it at the spot which they did so. In other words, exactly where the ball was spotted originally. So, it may not even be that such a play isn't *allowed* to be reviewed, just that it would accomplish nothing to do so.
In the case of this play, however, we have a pass ruled incomplete while in the ball is being held by a player. If the call is reversed, we have an inadvertent after the defender caught the ball. The whistle would have killed the play, but action to that point would stand, and Seattle would've ended up with the ball at the spot where it became dead.
My rule of thumb is that a play is reviewable unless a judgment call (usually a penalty) would be the subject of the review, but if there was a whistle, its effect on an overturned call must be considered before deciding to review. (That's my rule of thumb because it makes sense to me and I've not seen any counterexamples. Corrections are welcomed.)
|