RC issued in the bunker

[crossref]

So we in the North got our first high profile YC upgraded to RC offline

I liked it,
it meant they quickly got on with the game (which definitely did not any more extended periods with the clock stopped)

And I think it's quite good for the MO that the process is depersonalised. No one is talking about the referee decision to give a RC (as he didn't) and nobody has really bothered to put a name to the unseen person in the bunker

I think that's quite a good thing

 

[didds]

100% agree.

The raesoining etc can be published after the event - online, newspapers etc (there's a few column inches for free!)

 

[belladonna]

For me it was good that the game restarted quickly, but a shame we weren't given any reasoning eg never-legal, no drop in height, etc etc.

 

[Locke]

I agree with @belladonna. While I appreciate the game getting on more quickly, I would strongly prefer getting to hear the reasoning for why a yellow card has been upgraded. This was one was a clear red for me, but in less clear situations, I would think supporters of a team who are now a man down for the game when they were expecting/hoping for a yellow would be aggrieved that an invisible person has concluded it’s a send-off with no statement or explanation.

 

[crossref]

well today's result hasn't helped the case for the bunker -- bunkers were supposed to be able to make more accurate decisions, free of the time and emotional pressure placed on an on-field TMO and Ref

 

[didds]

Farrell CLEARED as red card rescinded in huge World Cup boost for England

England had feared Farrell would be banned for the entire World Cup pool stage but he has avoided any punishment

www.standard.co.uk

"Six Nations chief moved to insist the officials from Saturday’s match cannot be criticised for their judgement in the match. That stance will only further cloud rugby’s already confused disciplinary processes, at a time when the sport is desperately seeking clarity amid grave safety fears."

 

[belladonna]

Of course. A lawyer and two ex-players with no experience of refereeing, overrule a team of highly trained on-field officials. But no offence

 

[JohnP]

Views on the reasoning given, was he ever set up
To tackle legally?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Totally Pathetic!

 

[belladonna]

Views on the reasoning given, was he ever set up
To tackle legally?

Well quite. No attempt to wrap therefore always illegal and no mitigation. The actions of White #2 were marginal at best, I rewatched the replay half a dozen times to check. No lawyer representing to referees of course. What a farce.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Meanwhile, in the sticks, They are LOWERING the tackle height. Aledgedly head contact is dangerous. Nobody has told World Rugby about it.

 

[Camquin]

If this was Six Nations, not WR, can they be overruled?

 

[crossref]

If this was Six Nations, not WR, can they be overruled?

AIUI WR can't overrule it, but they can appeal it

 

[belladonna]

Either WR have to concede that a fully trained, professional, top-flight referee cannot make the right decision in 8 mins in a bunker with all the video angles available, or that 3 untrained non-referees are not qualified to judge a RC/YC decision. They can't have their cake and eat it. I feel so upset that once again the officials have been hung out to dry. Why would anyone continue to work for them under these undermining conditions?

 

[Decorily]

Either WR have to concede that a fully trained, professional, top-flight referee cannot make the right decision in 8 mins in a bunker with all the video angles available, or that 3 untrained non-referees are not qualified to judge a RC/YC decision. They can't have their cake and eat it. I feel so upset that once again the officials have been hung out to dry. Why would anyone continue to work for them under these undermining conditions?

Maybe WR need to reconsider what in fact would be the 'right' decision!

 

[Camquin]

Perhaps some of the Referee Societies could submit letters to WR, expressing discontent.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

What is the point of the "bunker"? WR have officially come out and said they got it wrong. So they can't be trusted in any review.

 

[Dixpat]

What is the point of the "bunker"? WR have officially come out and said they got it wrong. So they can't be trusted in any review.

Isn’t it more correct to say 3 individuals representing WR ….

Do we know what WR thinks of the decision?

in fact do we know who WR actually is?

 

[belladonna]

What is the point of the "bunker"? WR have officially come out and said they got it wrong. So they can't be trusted in any review.

Spot on. They have critically undermined their own institution.

 

[Decorily]

Spot on. They have critically undermined their own institution.

Actually I don't agree.
I believe the OF incident was misjudged by the official on the day and a YC should have been sufficient under current guidelines.