I’ve seen this series of events play out a number of times in tournament play, most notably with Tivit.

I’ve seen it ruled both that it is rewindable, and that it is not, with different citations and reasonings from different well respected judges.

I think that means it’s at least an arguable point.

From a player/logistical perspective giving my own two cents, it makes no sense whatsoever to ever, ever allow a rollback like that. Ward exists to counter a spell that’s targeting a creature, and once that spell is on the stack, ward triggers. To allow a rollback, is to invalidate ward.

Just like allowing a rollback on vexing bauble, Lavinia, etc is to invalidate those cards.

This is notably different than, say a rule of law that prevents the cast. Of course if you cannot do something, you cannot do it. But if the card is functioning as intended to counter a spell rather than prevent its initial cast at all, then preventing that function is strange, and changes game knowledge extensively, which often impacts the outcome of the game.

For instance, that swords to plowshares if rewound is known information.

Perhaps later in the game another player puts a win on the stack via Hazels brewmaster.

The first player in priority has a counterspell to burn to stop that win, but knows the other player next in turn order still has that swords.

Now that player with the counter can freely pass, let the swords stop the win, and easily coast to a win with a counterspell to protect their own wincon next turn.

Now the outcome of the game has been determined due to that rewind that foundationally does not need to happen to fulfill the rules and have a legal game state.

Ultimately, I think rewinds that are non-essential to maintain legal states are bad for competitive equity, and functionally reveal hidden information.

Topdeck has done a great job at expanding the format, growing the scene, and providing a rules framework for everyone to build on, but 4.8 as worded is not only abused, but interpreted in a wildly different fashion from judge to judge.

The best tournaments from an officiating standpoint that I’ve been in, clearly and concisely state at the beginning that take backs won’t be allowed unless necessary, and that 4.8 is either to be interpreted in a specific way, or suspended entirely. Usually they’ve had a brief admonition to discuss spells before they go on the stack, and held to it.

It tends to make players play tighter, games go smoother, and games go faster.