So not entirely unrelated to rugby, but inspired by the "appeal" system which exists in both cricket and tennis.
I'm not particularly interested in watching indeterminate replays over and over again. I can't do it on the pitch myself.
In cricket it would be relatively easy to "refer" a decision to the third umpire, and for the teams to have more appeals, but to simply get on with the game. And if the batsman proves actually out, give him out at the end of the over, or whatever. In tennis, hawk-eye is pretty quick and the only technique used (snickometers, hotspot and all that being irrelevant). Allow players a separate pool of appeals for when the umpire overrules, perhaps.
There are two issues in rugby where the TMO can genuinely add value. One is the grounding of the ball in-goal. The other is detection of foul play. Where grounding is uncertain, why not simply allow the conversion kick to be taken (generally takes over a minute nowadays at elite level, my players average 45 seconds at a guess). If it goes over, call it an "attempt at goal" if referred, and award two points EVEN IF the try is not certain. That is to say, conversion counts but try doesn't. And if there is an obvious drop/rip/whatever, award a single point, so that the kick is not pointless.
As to foul play, if not detected by the To3 give teams the right to appeal within 5 minutes, to both TMO and the opponents simultaneously (red button/phone) for an amount of money significant enough to individuals, but relatively insignificant amount for professional sport, but ten(+?) times as much if found to be ungrounded.
Long story short: no appeal system on the field of play for rugby. No long waits for almost-tries: reward the decent attack regardless. But similarly a reduction on the citing commission, with the TMO instead being able to advise the referee within 10 minutes of an incident of thuggery.
We have the technology!
I'm not particularly interested in watching indeterminate replays over and over again. I can't do it on the pitch myself.
In cricket it would be relatively easy to "refer" a decision to the third umpire, and for the teams to have more appeals, but to simply get on with the game. And if the batsman proves actually out, give him out at the end of the over, or whatever. In tennis, hawk-eye is pretty quick and the only technique used (snickometers, hotspot and all that being irrelevant). Allow players a separate pool of appeals for when the umpire overrules, perhaps.
There are two issues in rugby where the TMO can genuinely add value. One is the grounding of the ball in-goal. The other is detection of foul play. Where grounding is uncertain, why not simply allow the conversion kick to be taken (generally takes over a minute nowadays at elite level, my players average 45 seconds at a guess). If it goes over, call it an "attempt at goal" if referred, and award two points EVEN IF the try is not certain. That is to say, conversion counts but try doesn't. And if there is an obvious drop/rip/whatever, award a single point, so that the kick is not pointless.
As to foul play, if not detected by the To3 give teams the right to appeal within 5 minutes, to both TMO and the opponents simultaneously (red button/phone) for an amount of money significant enough to individuals, but relatively insignificant amount for professional sport, but ten(+?) times as much if found to be ungrounded.
Long story short: no appeal system on the field of play for rugby. No long waits for almost-tries: reward the decent attack regardless. But similarly a reduction on the citing commission, with the TMO instead being able to advise the referee within 10 minutes of an incident of thuggery.
We have the technology!
