ChuckieB, there are lots of situations where it is left to the officials to determine the sanction. Take a KO, normally a scrum, but if adjudged deliberate a PK and if judged cynical a YC and if done near the goal line, may be judged a PT and YC. This is actually what makes an important part of the game for me, that there is a trust in the officials to make these judgements and everyone (well excpet for many members of the press and a number of coaches) usually just gets on with it.
Totally agree that the referee has to be relied upon to make a certain judgements and for you it is in an environment without the help of technology.
There is slightly different angle to be seen on this one:
Different to RWC 2015 where we know for such an instance CJ had no TMO review protocol he could call on.
This was a TMO decision making a call on basic points of fact, rather than some form of judgement (Nothing about C&O or degree of sanction)
Did the ball go forward? - yes
Did his own player pick it up to try and gain an advantage - yes (he went on to claim a try)
Did it prevent an opponent from gaining an advantage - yes (the opponent was unable to play the ball)
"What's the judgement call in that?", I might ask myself.
This is the pinnacle of the game and with the technology at their fingertips it shouldn't be the sort of call that people are left still wondering on.
I am no clearer as to whether it was something they called wrong or whether the laws are not sufficiently robust enough to be deemed reliable in certain areas. We don't want to be left in a situation where people suspect they are making it up as they go along (and we know we don't condone that).