I think Synovia has given up on the thread. Either he recognizes what we're saying and has given up, or he thinks we're all idiots. Either way, more is piling on. But, I can't help myself.
:bricks:
Here's another question. Suppose it's right that the jumbotron can be used to review plays because, as has been asserted in this thread, "there's nothing in the rules prohibiting it."
Can the jumbo tron be used to make a call even after another play has occurred? Why not? Let's say that there's a throw to the end zone. The receiver gets both feet in bounds but is called out of bounds. The coach cannot challenge because he's out of challenges. On the next play, the offense throws an interception returned for a touchdown.
After the interception, they replay the blown call on the jumbotron. The crew sees it and sees that the player did have both feet in bounds. Can they take the interception return off the board and award the touchdown based on the jumbo tron.
Of course not. But why not? Under the theory being expressed here, the reason the jumbotron can be used is because there's nothing in the rule book that prohbits it. We're also told that the rules that apply to video replay -- which plays can be reviewed and which can't (e.g., possession can be but penalties can't) -- do not apply on a jumbotron review, because those rules only apply for an "under the hood review." But the rule that says there cannot be a challenge or overturn after the next play is run
also is in the "under the hood" review rules. Since we're dealing in an imaginary world where anything not specifically prohibited is allowed, what is the principle that keeps the officials from using their jumbotron review to review plays that happened several plays ago?
