Does anyone remember the 2002 Divisional Round playoff game between the Patriots and the Raiders? Right or wrong, the call that won the Pats that game cemented the status of the "Tuck Rule" in the NFL -- if the ball is moving forward out of the QB's hands when lost, it is ruled an incomplete pass.
So why isn't more being made of the Kurt Warner "fumble" that ended the Super Bowl? The only time I have seen it really looked into has been on NFL Live, by Trey Wingo and company. And they found, however reliably, that the play should have been called an incomplete pass.
Although the Steelers defender got his hand on the ball before Warner came forward with it, Warner maintained possession until his arm came forward. And although the "pass" that resulted sure looked like a fumble, by rule, it was not -- it was an incompletion. And I thought it was pretty obvious.
Even if it wasn't obvious, it surely warranted review. Would it have changed the outcome of the game? Very, very likely not. But it's a shame what was a very entertaining Super Bowl had to be ended on a blown call/non-review. And the argument that the celebration shouldn't have been interrupted by an unnecessary review is irrelevant -- if a review needs to be undertaken, it needs to be undertaken, no matter the stage and no matter the time of the game.