SANZAR to trial review system

[Baylion]

SANZAR is reportedly planning to introduce a cricket-style decision review system from 2016 following a number of poor refereeing decisions.

According to The Australian, SANZAR is locked into the refereeing protocols that will carry through to next year’s Rugby World Cup in England, but after that the review system is likely to be trialed by the southern hemisphere's governing body.

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/RugbyChampionship/SANZAR-to-trial-review-system-20140912

Full Aricle: http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx

 

[Browner]

Oh no......... Thin end of the wedge !

So, the referee has been challenged by the captain and his decision reversed by the guy in the van. X4 reversed decisions later and the crowd and players are Now booing him , by now the referee confidence has been publically shattered and he is ditheringly hesitant on other decisions

Can the other captain appeal the overturning?!!!????

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Oh no......... Thin end of the wedge !

So, the referee has been challenged by the captain and his decision reversed by the guy in the van. X4 reversed decisions later and the crowd and players are Now booing him , by now the referee confidence has been publically shattered and he is ditheringly hesitant on other decisions

Can the other captain appeal the overturning?!!!????

Much as it pains me to say it.....I agree with Browner! :biggrin:

 

[Ian_Cook]

Oh no......... Thin end of the wedge !

So, the referee has been challenged by the captain and his decision reversed by the guy in the van. X4 reversed decisions later and the crowd and players are Now booing him , by now the referee confidence has been publically shattered and he is ditheringly hesitant on other decisions

Can the other captain appeal the overturning?!!!????

Just like this happened with cricket umpires..... oh, hang on!

 

[Browner]

Much as it pains me to say it.....I agree with Browner! :biggrin:

No pain - no gain LLP ....

Seriously though, you're probably imagining why an Elite trialling of " challenging the referees decision" might not be a good culture to cultivate in the testosterone fuelled multi law interpretational world of rugby union

Law 10.4(s)
All players must respect the authority of the referee. They must not dispute the referee’s decisions

............. irrespective of whether the professionals are being allowed to do exactly that under a " remote referee ' overidding the referee on the pitch system that commenced in year 2016 with the paltry '3' challenges rule, that we now know was insufficient to satisfy the audiences/players/coaches ,...................................,

its now 2019 and its time to introduce an 'unlimited' challenge system, its the only way forward.

 

[irishref]

Just like this happened with cricket umpires..... oh, hang on!

apples and pears if you ask me, a (basically) sedate game that is a series of set-pieces with no contact vs Rugby Union. Totally different pressures and expections on how each game is officiated.

 

[Ian_Cook]

apples and pears if you ask me, a (basically) sedate game that is a series of set-pieces with no contact vs Rugby Union. Totally different pressures and expections on how each game is officiated.

Nonetheless, when the DRS was introduced in cricket, there were critics who said exactly what Browner is saying, that umpires would have their decision-making confidence shattered. Well, it hasn't happened; quite the opposite actually.

As a referee, I'd far rather find out that I had a major decision wrong "on the field" and at the time, than find out I cost a team a match after the final whistle.

 

[4eyesbetter]

Nonetheless, when the DRS was introduced in cricket, there were critics who said exactly what Browner is saying, that umpires would have their decision-making confidence shattered. Well, it hasn't happened; quite the opposite actually.

As far as I'm aware, Hawkeye is yet to develop to the point where it can give a yes/no on killing the ball...

 

[Rushforth]

Nonetheless, when the DRS was introduced in cricket, there were critics who said exactly what Browner is saying, that umpires would have their decision-making confidence shattered. Well, it hasn't happened; quite the opposite actually.

As a referee, I'd far rather find out that I had a major decision wrong "on the field" and at the time, than find out I cost a team a match after the final whistle.

However, India, who have chosen not to accept DRS in their matches, have had games where they must have wished they had it after all, and the umpires in some of the games have been lambasted by the press/those able to watch Sky/those not able to watch at all but happen to have a voice on the internet.

Also, Irishref, or "Professor Lupin" as he henceforth shall be known, may not have faced a bouncer let alone a beamer Emotions run just as high when a beamer is unintentionally bowled as when an over-enthusiastic tackler unintentionally tips a ball carrier.

 

[Ian_Cook]

As far as I'm aware, Hawkeye is yet to develop to the point where it can give a yes/no on killing the ball...

Irrelevant since Hawkeye is used for only one of the ten possible modes of dismissal.

An appeal is just a request to use the TMO, so there is no different or new technology involved. Limit appeals to just two unsuccessful requests per team and I cannot see any harm. Where the T03+ have missed something clear and obvious, I think its fair enough that someone bring that to the attention of the referee.

See the holding back of Savea in the opening minutes of the NZ v Argentina test last week.... a case where 30,000 people at the ground and a few million people on TV saw it (myself, and the three people I was watching it with all spotted it in real time, first time), yet somehow two officials (one of whom was just a couple of metres away) who were looking right at it managed to miss the clear and obvious.

If a referee's self-esteem is so fragile that he will have his "confidence publicly shattered" if his decisions are questioned and then overturned then he has no business being a referee. Take a look at NRL some time. How often do referees nominate "try" or "no try" when going to the Video Ref, only to have their nomination overturned? Do they become "ditheringly hesitant on other decisions" after this happens?

 

[4eyesbetter]

Irrelevant since Hawkeye is used for only one of the ten possible modes of dismissal.

But undoubtedly the most controversial and headline-making mode, and also the one where accuracy has been improved most by having it, by stopping them hiding behind "it was drifting down the leg side" (especially for off-spinners) and so on.

I agree with trialling it because I'm generally in favour of trying things that haven't been done before (if nothing else, it stops people bitching about how they should do it if it turns out to be a bad idea), but let's not pretend like this is a directly comparable situation where technology can directly affect some important area of the game that used to be a fungible black art and bring a great deal of clarity to it.

 

[Ian_Cook]

But undoubtedly the most controversial and headline-making mode, and also the one where accuracy has been improved most by having it, by stopping them hiding behind "it was drifting down the leg side" (especially for off-spinners) and so on.

I agree with trialling it because I'm generally in favour of trying things that haven't been done before (if nothing else, it stops people bitching about how they should do it if it turns out to be a bad idea), but let's not pretend like this is a directly comparable situation where technology can directly affect some important area of the game that used to be a fungible black art and bring a great deal of clarity to it.

Really, I was only answering the OTT criticism that an official would become a dithering, indecisive idiot merely because a few of his decisions might be questioned and overturned. Cricket umpires and NRL referees clearly have not.

There are two likely ways a person can deal with finding out they have made mistakes

► lose confidence, self-esteem and plummet into a descending spiral of uncertainty

► learn from the experience and use the failure to learn, grow and become better at their job.

I would like to think that most referees fall into the latter category, and that any who fall into the former will have been weeded out long before they reach elite level.

 

[Fatboy_Ginge]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't people already complaining about TMO delays WITHOUT further reviews...

I can just hear the commentators now...

 

[Ian_Cook]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't people already complaining about TMO delays WITHOUT further reviews...

I can just hear the commentators now...

I'd say that is not a majority view. Getting more decisions right is far more important than "hurry up and finish"

Also, TMO decisions do not eat into actual game time, because clock stops. What wastes time is the interminable amount of arseing about with continual scrum resets because four players numbered 1 & 3 are having their own pissing contest.

 

[Camquin]

It is closer to the field hockey scheme than cricket or tennis. Hockey has one per side per half, so captains only use it for the cases of a clear offence where the umpire was unsighted. The more reviews you allow the more likely they will be used speculatively.

There would be no point the other captain calling for the review to be overturned as I doubt the original call would be overturned unless it is clear and obvious.

Camquin

 

[Daftmedic]

Errrmmmmm. Did someone post this after 1st April by accident?