[Assistant Referees] Revised TMO trial

[mcroker]

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/worl...ould-fundamentally-change-how-the-tmo-is-used

For me this is a step in completely the wrong direction, I think the on the run consultation of the TMO enhances the decision making, and allows play to flow.

 

[Elpablo73]

I've got to agree, the on the run consult was an effective way to confirm that thing that you thought you saw out of the corner of your eye. AR's aren't always going to be able to see these, but the TMO might have the perfect view!

 

[Ian_Cook]

A huge step in the wrong direction. The on the run communications have the potential for zero time impact.

For the awarding of tries, what was done in Super Rugby (and Mitre 10 cup) has been brilliant this year. The referee makes the decision he would make if there were no TMO - "Try or No Try" and if he has doubts he calls in the TMO. If the TMO finds clear and obvious evidence that the referee is wrong, he overturns the decision; if not, then the on-field decision stands. Its the system with the least amount of confusion (both the NFL and NRL use this system; they are both a long way ahead of us in the use of video technology).

It seems some of the old guard of WR are still invested in the quaint old idea that one man is the "sole judge of fact". That is a time and a philosophy that went out with the advent of professional Rugby Union. It may still apply at the amateur level, but there is simply no place for it at the top end of the game. There is now a team of four match officials, lets use them to the best and most efficient advantage.

If it was my place to say what happens, this is what I would do:

1. Keep the on the run chat
2. Keep the TMO calling in foul play just like the ARs do. We want to increase the chances of catching dirty players, not increase their chances of getting away with it.
3. Keep the "Try-No try" call we have now in SR
4. Dispense with having the on field referee watching the big screen and "helping" the TMO to make a decision. Once the Referee hands the job off to the TMO it becomes HIS decision, and that decision is final (a la the NRL)

 

[Pinky]

A huge step in the wrong direction.

It seems some of the old guard of WR are still invested in the quaint old idea that one man is the "sole judge of fact". That is a time and a philosophy that went out with the advent of professional Rugby Union. It may still apply at the amateur level, but there is simply no place for it at the top end of the game. There is now a team of four match officials, lets use them to the best and most efficient advantage.

I agree with this, however the ending of the sole arbiter of fact came with the advent of the video recorder with which it is easy on occasion to prove a referee is wrong in fact.

 

[Pinky]

I agree with Ian's 1 and 2 - the latter particularly for the reasons he highlights.

I have not noticed a difference in the SR review of tries, or been concerned that the review is in anyway a problem. I suppose the "any reason not to award" is pretty much in practice the same as try or no try except is there is no visible grounding to the cameras? I quite like that the referee can still award a try in such circumstances.

The bit i disagree with is watching the replays. I think it will help with consistency of decisions, especially with high tackles and foul play if all 4 discuss what they have seen and what the sanction should be, but agree there are some things that need not be discussed, eg forward pass or offside - if the TMO says yes then no try!

 

[tewdric]

The one thing I find irritating as a spectator is the TMO calling the ref to inform them of foul play, which often leads to a pause. I think that anything not picked up on the field or the touchlines is best dealt with by citing, or not at all. Consulting on the run while play continues has to be a good thing though. I'm not sure handing decisions over to the TMO is the right thing to do - they should be there to assist and advise, including showing big screen replays if that helps, but the responsibility for the decision should stay with the referee IMHO.

 

[Phil E]

The one thing I find irritating as a spectator is the TMO calling the ref to inform them of foul play, which often leads to a pause. I think that anything not picked up on the field or the touchlines is best dealt with by citing, or not at all. Consulting on the run while play continues has to be a good thing though. I'm not sure handing decisions over to the TMO is the right thing to do - they should be there to assist and advise, including showing big screen replays if that helps, but the responsibility for the decision should stay with the referee IMHO.

The referee always has the final say on decisions. He may ask if the TMO agrees with him, but it's his decision alone at the end of the day.