Originally Posted by archibaldleach The degree to which people know about a rule doesn't affect whether the rule exists
. In any event, the refs' job is to know and apply the rules. One could argue the players should know it too.
We don't know what the counterfactual would be if the rule was not broken. Holding is called even if sometimes it did not affect the play in a meaningful way
. Plus when the refs' review plays, obscure rules come out all the time. Think non-catches, the Tuck Rule, etc.
Bottom line is the correct call very likely would have changed the outcome of the game. There is also no doubt on what the correct call was.
1. Correct, but if nobody (including the rule breaker) is aware of the rule, it should greatly limit the "outrage" of it being broken. This is especially salient with regards to people saying that Seattle cheated to win the game.
2. Exactly, and when a call is missed that doesn't affect a play, nobody really gets (and shouldn't) all twisted up about it.