[Law] May in-goal hold back?

[crossref]

I assume the TMO is in a soundproof bubble and doesn't even see the general TV coverage.

In this case it may have helped because it was one of the first things the commentators picked up on.

I would think the TMO can hear the crowd noise in general
I wound be astonished if he is fed the TV commentary

 

[tewdric]

I'm having dinner with NO in a couple of weeks - I'll ask him.

 

[thepercy]

Page 1 of the 2019 book states

[LAWS]APPLICATION
There is an over-riding obligation on the players to observe the laws and to respect the
principles of fair play. The laws must be applied in such a way as to ensure that the game is
played according to the principles of play. The match officials can achieve this through
fairness, consistency, sensitivity and, when appropriate, management. In return, it is the
responsibility of coaches, captains and players to respect the authority of the match officials.[/LAWS]

I take that to include using the principles of Material effect.

I am all for the use of material effect in making refereeing decisions. I wanted to know where it was laid out, so I could read the guidance, and if there was any mention of special treatment for foul play as had been mention further down thread. But it isn't in the LotG, only alluded to on the WR web page and in the forward to the book.

Anyone have any other guidance on the use of ME?

 

[thepercy]

So now your suggesting the referee was biased to England and cheated?
Totally out of order and untrue.

I didn't read this as a bias to one team or the other. More so, that if this same action was done by a defending player to an attacking player, preventing a possible try (even if the colors were reversed) then it would have been scrutinized and potentially sanctioned.

Is there a bias in favor of attaching teams? I'd suggest, yes.

 

[crossref]

I am all for the use of material effect in making refereeing decisions. I wanted to know where it was laid out, so I could read the guidance, and if there was any mention of special treatment for foul play as had been mention further down thread. But it isn't in the LotG, only alluded to on the WR web page and in the forward to the book.

Anyone have any other guidance on the use of ME?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I always thought it was the Yanks no one likes. The French bring so much to the party Wine food style etc I like them. One of the reasons I cringe watching the french of recent (non) vintage. It is so sad to see their colapse as a rugby nation on the international stage.

As an aside, what is lso worrying is just how poor Wales' display was a week ago. Now that the England side has put some perspective on it.

I don't like the Yanks nor the Mets.

 

[Balones]

Viewing the video *in slow motion and several times* before coming to a conclusion suggests the offence is a long way from "clear and obvious" and it is very hard to definitively conclucethat this was not just a rugby incident. Play on.

Sorry for not being clear. I was reviewing the part of the incident that OB.. was referring to. The actual holding back is clear and obvious. What I am not saying is that it is certain that Dupont would have got to the ball. He was held back and we will never know. Just as those that say that he definitely would not have got to the ball. That is not certain either. He might have been able to put his body between the ball and Farrell and made it more difficult for Farrell?

Like Phil E, I have not said the decision was right or wrong. I was just trying to state some facts as I saw them.

 

[crossref]

Good point.. if Dupont was able to compete Farrell might have fumbled

 

[didds]

Good point.. if Dupont was able to compete Farrell might have fumbled

... yesss... but if my aunt had a willy shed be my uncle.

If Dupont was able to compete Farrell might have shoved him out of the way and received a yellow card... or Dupont might have elbowed farrell in the face and got a red card... etc

didds

 

[Balones]

... yesss... but if my aunt had a willy shed be my uncle.

If Dupont was able to compete Farrell might have shoved him out of the way and received a yellow card... or Dupont might have elbowed farrell in the face and got a red card... etc

didds

So you are saying it could have been material?��

Then we have the old question of whether you penalise the offence or the outcome or the potential outcome.

 

[Arabcheif]

I believe that the decision to award the try was wrong personally I feel the the holding was material as it's in the tick of the action (the ball was not 5 meters or more away). But it didn't affect the overall outcome of the match, so no real harm done.