Instant Replay: What Can and Cannot Be Reviewed
Which football calls replay can overturn and which it cannot, who starts a review at the NFL, college and high school levels, and what standard of evidence officials need to change a ruling.
A receiver dives for the corner of the end zone. The official signals touchdown, the crowd erupts, and the broadcast shows a replay in which the ball seems to squirt loose as the receiver hits the ground. Within seconds the commentators are asking the question that every fan eventually asks: can they review that?
The honest answer is "it depends on what the call was." Instant replay in football is not a general appeals court. It is a narrow tool, built around a list of specific questions that video can answer with confidence. Questions of judgment, such as whether a hold was serious enough to flag, are mostly left to the officials on the field.
This article explains the logic of the system: which categories of calls can be reviewed, which cannot, who has the power to start a review, and how much evidence it takes to change a call. Rules differ across the NFL, college football and high school football, and they change over time, so the specifics below should be checked against the current rulebook for the level you follow.
The basic idea: facts, not opinions
Replay works best on facts that a camera can show. Did the ball cross the goal line? Did the receiver's foot touch the sideline? Did the ball hit the ground? Was the runner down before he fumbled?
It works poorly on judgments, where reasonable officials can disagree even with perfect video. Was the contact by a defender enough to count as interference? Was a tackle "late"? Did a lineman hold a defender, or just block him?
Leagues build their replay rules around this distinction. The reviewable list is a list of factual questions. The not-reviewable list is, for the most part, a list of judgment calls. A few categories sit in between, and leagues have changed their minds about them over the years, as we will see.
What is commonly reviewable
The list varies, but most leagues that use replay allow some version of the following.
- Scoring plays. Did the runner or receiver cross the goal line? Was the ball in the end zone when the player had control? Did a kick cross the uprights?
- Turnovers. Was a pass intercepted or did it hit the ground? Did a fumble occur, and who recovered?
- Catch or no catch. Did the receiver complete the process of a catch, with control and the required foot or feet down? What counts as a catch is explained in our guide to completing a reception.
- In or out of bounds. Did a player step out of bounds, or was the ball out of bounds when a player touched it?
- Forward pass or backward pass. Was a throw forward or lateral, and was the passer behind the line of scrimmage?
- Runner down. Was a runner down by contact before the ball came loose?
- Some clock questions. In some leagues, whether time should have run out at the end of a half.
Note how many of these are really about the same few things: the ball, the lines and the ground. These are the facts that television cameras can show clearly.
What is not reviewable
The not-reviewable list is just as important, because it explains most of the plays that frustrate fans.
- Holding. Whether a block or a grab was legal is a judgment, and in general it is not reviewable.
- Most pass interference calls. Pass interference, both called and not called, was made reviewable in the NFL for one season, 2019, on a trial basis, and the league did not keep it for the next season. The episode is a good illustration of how hard it is to apply a "clear and obvious" standard to contact on a deep pass.
- Roughing the passer and other personal fouls. These are judgments about the severity and timing of contact.
- Forward progress and ordinary spots. The place where an official decided a runner was stopped is a judgment, with narrow exceptions such as whether the ball broke the plane of the goal line.
- Plays ended early by an inadvertent whistle. Leagues tend to handle these separately from ordinary reviews, because video cannot show what would have happened had the play continued.
- Offside and false starts. In general, pre-snap fouls are not reviewable.
You will see the pattern: a replay rule that asks "did this physical event happen?" tends to be allowed, and one that asks "was this a foul?" tends to be excluded. There are exceptions, and they are the cases that cause arguments.
The special case: targeting in college
College football has a famous exception. A foul called for targeting, which is a dangerous hit on a defenseless player or a hit that leads with the crown of the helmet, carries an ejection. Because of the stakes, targeting calls are reviewed by the replay official, and the decision can be confirmed or overturned.
The review focuses on specific elements the rulebook defines. If the video shows that a required element is missing, the call is overturned and the player is no longer ejected. The details of what happens to the yardage after an overturn are spelled out in the rulebook and have been adjusted over time, so check the current wording if it matters to you.
This is an example of replay used to cushion a harsh consequence. The consequence of an ejection is so large that leagues want a second look, even though the underlying call is partly a judgment.
Who starts a review
There are two main ways a review begins, and the difference is one of the most important ideas in the topic.
- Official review (booth review). An official in the replay booth, or a replay official at a central location, decides that a play needs a look and starts a review without anyone asking. This is how automatic reviews of scores and turnovers work.
- Coach's challenge. A coach throws a flag or signals the officials to ask for a review. The rules usually limit how many times a coach can do this, and they attach a cost, such as a timeout.
At the NFL level, both systems are used. Certain categories of plays are reviewed automatically, and coaches have a limited number of challenges for plays that are not. In the last two minutes of each half and in overtime, the booth takes over and coaches cannot challenge; the replay official starts any review. Our articles on coach's challenges and the NFL replay review system describe the details.
Many college conferences rely mainly on the booth, where a replay official watches every play and can stop the game to look at one. Some conferences have tried allowing coach challenges, with their own limits, so the system varies from league to league.
Most high school games use no replay at all. The budget for cameras, a booth and trained staff is out of reach for most schools, so calls are decided by the crew on the field and are final. Some state associations allow replay in certain championship games or showcase events, but that is the exception rather than the rule. If you are a parent or a coach, ask your state association whether replay is allowed in your games.
How a review works
Reviews follow a pattern that is similar at different levels.
- A play happens and the official makes a ruling on the field. The ruling stands unless the review finds a reason to change it.
- A review is triggered. Either automatically or by a challenge. The game stops, and the referee tells the crowd that the play is under review.
- The video is examined. The reviewing official looks at the available angles, often many of them, usually slowed down or frozen, and focuses on the key moment.
- A decision is made. The reviewing official either confirms the call, which means the video does not show it to be wrong, or reverses it. Sometimes the finding is "the ruling on the field stands."
- The referee announces the result. The referee explains the outcome, spots the ball for the next play, and sets the clock if the review affected it.
The reviewing official can see far more than the on-field crew. The crew has to make a decision in real time from one angle, while the reviewer can see the play from different cameras. That asymmetry is the justification for replay.
The evidence standard: why "stands" is common
You will hear that a ruling needs to be "clear and obvious" or supported by "indisputable" video evidence. Different levels use slightly different words, but the idea is the same: the ruling on the field is the starting point, and it only changes if the video clearly shows it is wrong.
This standard explains many results that surprise fans.
- A call stands because the video is inconclusive. If one camera angle suggests the ball moved and another suggests it did not, the ruling stays. Replay is not asked to decide who is slightly more likely to be right.
- The call on the field matters. If the on-field ruling was "incomplete," the reviewer needs clear evidence of a catch. If it was "catch," the reviewer needs clear evidence of no catch. The starting point changes the burden.
- Everyone sees the same video, but not the same threshold. A fan watching a replay at home with commentators' opinions can feel certain. A reviewer who has to find "indisputable" evidence may not.
The standard exists for a reason. If every close call were overturned by a slight preponderance of evidence, games would be decided by the replay booth rather than the field, and the number of stoppages would rise.
Three hypothetical plays
Sorting made-up plays into the two piles is the quickest way to get comfortable with the logic.
Play one. A receiver catches a pass near the sideline and the official rules him in bounds. Slow-motion video shows his toe touching the white line as he lands. This is a factual question about a line and a foot, so it is reviewable. If the video clearly shows the toe on the line, the ruling is reversed to incomplete. If the angle is blurry, the ruling on the field stands.
Play two. On a long pass, a defender grabs the receiver's jersey and the receiver loses the ball. No flag is thrown. Fans scream for a review. Under most rulebooks the answer is that a foul that was not called is a judgment call, and it cannot be created by video. The only way a review enters is if the same play also contains a reviewable fact, such as whether the pass was caught.
Play three. A runner stretches toward the goal line and the official signals touchdown. The ball may or may not have broken the plane before the runner's knee hit the ground. This is a scoring play, so at levels with replay it is reviewed, and the question is the position of the ball relative to the goal line at the moment the runner was down. If the video cannot show it, the touchdown stands.
In each case the question to ask is the same: is there a single moment in time that a camera can capture and a rulebook can name? If so, the play is a candidate for review. If the answer depends on how serious the contact looked, it is not.
The trade-offs
Replay has costs, which is why leagues keep it narrow.
- Time. Each review stops the game. The longer reviews can take several minutes, which is hard on the live crowd and the television schedule.
- Momentum. A review can interrupt an offense's rhythm or a team's emotional lift after a big play.
- Consistency. Cameras differ by stadium and by broadcast. An angle that is available in one game may not exist in another.
- Fairness of a narrow list. When a clear mistake falls into the not-reviewable category, fans feel the system failed, even though it worked as designed.
Leagues weigh these costs against the benefit of getting big plays right. That is why the list of reviewable plays changes from time to time, and why it is a mistake to assume that last year's list applies this year.
Common misconceptions
"Replay can fix any bad call." It cannot. Only plays in the reviewable categories can be changed.
"If it's on video, they have to overturn it." Not necessarily. The evidence has to be clear enough to meet the standard.
"The announcers know more than the officials." They often have more angles and more time, but they are not applying the rulebook standard. Their opinion does not change the ruling.
"Replay is only used at the professional level." Many college conferences use it, and some high school championships do too. Check the level you follow.
"A challenge is free." Usually it is not. A losing challenge normally costs a team something, such as a timeout.
What to watch for
Next time a review happens, watch for these details.
- Whether the review is automatic or started by a challenge flag.
- How many angles are shown on the broadcast, and whether any is conclusive.
- What the referee says when the review ends: "the ruling on the field is confirmed," "stands," or "reversed."
- What happens to the clock and the spot after a reversal.
You can see how the results of close games turned out on our scores page, and you can check upcoming games on the schedule. If you play or coach at a level without replay, remember that the crew's decision on the field is the decision. Learning the basic rules in our Play section will help you understand and accept calls that go either way.
The short version
- Replay answers factual questions the camera can show, such as whether the ball crossed a line or touched the ground.
- Judgment calls such as holding and most pass interference are generally not reviewable.
- Reviews are started either by an official in the booth or by a coach's challenge, depending on the level and the situation.
- A ruling changes only if the video evidence is clear; an inconclusive angle means the call stands.
- College football reviews targeting because it carries an ejection.
- Most high school games have no replay, and reviewable lists change over time, so check the current rulebook for your level.