What the rules don't say is as important as what they exactly specify. Held ball is a great example. "4-25: .. opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness." Because the rules specify hands (plural), there can be no held ball when one or both opponents have a single hand firmly on the ball (other than a blocked try). But you see it all the time: a scrum on the floor that is clearly going nowhere and the held ball call is prematurely ruled. This year I made it a personal POE to try to be patient to let the held ball develop on its own but sometimes it seemed that to wait for the criteria to be exactly met risked undue rough play and tempers unneccessarily. Perhaps the rules should allow for a held ball call when in the official's judgment the call is inevitable (or nearly so)?

Good point. I've noticed that half the time the players are reaching in their to get the whistle, and not to get the ball. The problem is, they've always gotten a quick whistle on those, so they expect it and sometimes almost quit playing.
If they'd actually try to take the ball instead of just getting a held-ball whistle, they'd get more steals.

If each player has one hand on the ball, don't they have their hands on it? I don't think the "hands" applies to each opponent. JMO.

But the practical side of the matter is that if you only have one hand on it, it can probably be stolen without undue force.