Is the seahawks-niners game further evidence that fumbles should be reviewable?

[cltchperf]

Luckily the hawks didn't score and it didn't cost the niners there. However, that made me think of the Steelers-dolphins game back in 2010, where Ben fumbled the ball before getting in the endzone. That was recovered by bowman and if it was reviewable, it would have and should have been niners ball. Hopefully the league looks into that and makes fumbles reviewable in the field of play. Obviously some reviews wouldn't help as you can't see through all the players. But sometimes there are plays like this game, where the guy did have it and recovered the ball only for it to not count.

 

[BahamaFinFan78]

I think EVERYTHING should be reviewable, unless the whistle was blown. If you throw the flag and the refs can't see indisputably, then you just lost a TO.

 

[Finlawyer]

Should be reviewable.

 

[NY8123]

The problem comes when you rule the guy down by forward progress or down by contact. When that happens the ref blows the whistle and if that happens to be in conjunction with a fumble that should actually be a fumble, how do you prove that the recovery didn't come because people stopped because whistle blew? In this case it was clear there was fumble and it was recovered but in the case of the Pitt/Miami game, even though I myself came off my rocker and swore for 15 minutes straight over the ass rapping, the proof of what happened after the whistle blew is impossible to determine, what player stopped play, which player continued play etc...

It is a tough one for sure.