Assuming they would be asking for a timeout when there is no such evidence is not a good way to call the game. White had possession one time for sure and likely two time. The shot clock should have been reset. And the clock operator has the worst view of when to reset it in these types of plays. On shots, sure, they usually get it (but not always). In this case, I'm not trusting their opinion for anything.

I'm not suggesting we assume the TO request, just that we would likely see a request if the video showed the front side of this play. What I find interesting is that it's a gray area play that can be adjudicated in several reasonable ways. What's the "right" way? I'm still leaning toward a violation, but what do I know?

Why would you lean towards a violation when you can see the other team holding the ball before it gets to 25 seconds? The fact that the shot clock operator couldn't see it is not a relevant fact.

Depends entirely on whether white had the ball, whether white requested a TO, whether the held ball was judged to happen at 26 or at 25 seconds.