SHould the TMO be allowed to tell the referee about Foul Play

[Ian_Cook]

Some occurrences on the weekend highlight the absurdity of the current TMO protocols

In the the second Springboks v Lions test, Springbok flanker Schalk Burger eye-gouged Luke Fitzgerald with just a minute played. The incident was spotted by AR Stuart Dickinson and reported to referee Christophe Berdos, and Burger got a YC.

In the All Blacks v Italy match, the Azzuri No. 8 Sergio Parisse went totally unpunished after eye-gouging Isaac Ross. The incident was missed by referee George Clancy and both ARs but clearly spotted by TMO George Ayoub, yet he is forbidden to report this to the referee. This is a ridiculous state of affairs.

IMO, the TMO should be allowed to inform the referee if he sees an act of foul play, i.e., anything that is covered by LAW 10.4 DANGEROUS PLAY AND MISCONDUCT, that the referee has missed.

What do you think?

 

[OB..]

We do need something more, particularly with the 99 type of situation.

I would certainly think it worth experimenting with calling in the TMO in eg the Burger case. That is just an expansion of his current role. However I note that an earlier experiment of asking the TMO to identify players involved in foul play was discontinued - I don't know why, but would like to.

The Parisse case is more difficult. AIUI the TMO is not scanning play for such things. He gets the standard feed (minus commentary) until he is needed. It would thus be something of a lottery which bits of such play he would see (even more than it is with the on-field officials).

However if you can't do it for Burger, a fortiori you cannot do it for Parisse.

 

[andyscott]

in my opinion

The TMO should only be used to identify players as in, if the referee asks 'I saw red player punch X what was the number' etc. I would not be happy with the TMO stoppimg play, the referee and 2 ARs are enough for me.

Sure they will miss things but there is always citing after the game.
We could argue till the cows come home about how much technology and even how many cameras and where they are, angles of view, focal length of lenses etc. They all vary game to game and affect the decisions made.

I think it is ok the way it is

 

[Ian_Cook]

... AIUI the TMO is not scanning play for such things. He gets the standard feed (minus commentary) until he is needed. It would thus be something of a lottery which bits of such play he would see (even more than it is with the on-field officials).

However if you can't do it for Burger, a fortiori you cannot do it for Parisse.

I don't think the "lottery" argument, i.e. that some things will be spotted and some won't is valid. You could use the same argument to take away AR powers and return them to being TJ's as there is a lot they do not spot. Also, the TMO gets the same feed we all see in television, but AIUI he can ask for replays separately if he wishes. He must have seen the replay of the eye-gouge, but his hands were tied by the protocols.

IMO, any time the "right" decision is arrived at is good, and anytime it doesn't is not. To me this is a case of the end justifying the means.

There was another incident that occurred in the match, where a try was disallowed (Kieran Read) because Black 14 had pushed a Blue player prior to the grounding. Ayoub's decision to advise the referee to award a PK against Black for the push was completely outside the TMO protocols on two counts.

1. The push took place in the Field of Play and was therefore not in the TMO's purview.

2. The push was not related to the actual grounding of the ball.

However, the decision reached in the end WAS the correct one, so I am happy enough with it.

 

[David J.]

Can players not carded during the match still be cited? Post-match discipline (suspensions, fines, etc) even though the ref didn't see it?

 

[Dickie E]

I've sat beside a TMO (recently) and he focussed hard when ball in 22 and relaxed when ball was between 22s.

To have to focus hard on a TV screen for 80 minutes would be a tough gig.

Its seems to be done successfully in RL in Oz, though.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Can players not carded during the match still be cited? Post-match discipline (suspensions, fines, etc) even though the ref didn't see it?

Yes he can

Regulation 17
17.6.2 When a Citing Commissioner is appointed, the following policy shall
apply:
(a) Citing Commissioners shall be entitled to cite a player for any act or
acts of Illegal and/or Foul Play which in the opinion of the Citing
Commissioner warranted the Player concerned being Ordered Off;
(b) Citing Commissioners may cite Players for an act or acts of Illegal
and/or Foul Play even where such act or acts may have been detected
by the referee and/or touch judge and which may have been the
subject of action taken by the referee and/or touch judge. A Citing
Commissioner may not, however, cite a Player for an act or acts of
Illegal and/or Foul Play in respect of which the Player has been
Ordered Off;
(c) A Player may be cited by the Citing Commissioner if he has been
Temporarily Suspended. Such citing may be made in respect of the
incident or incidents for which the Player was Temporarily
Suspended or otherwise;
(d) Citing Commissioners shall act independently of the Judicial Officer
or Disciplinary Committee and of the referee and/or touch judges of a
Match;
(e) The Union or other affiliated organisation responsible for the
management of either participating team in a Match shall not have
the power to cite a Player for Illegal and/or Foul Play but may refer
any incident of Illegal and/or Foul Play to the Citing Commissioner
for consideration provided such incident is referred to the Citing
Commissioner within 12 hours of the conclusion of the Match in
which the incident is alleged to have occurred. A Citing
Commissioner's decision as to whether a Player should be cited (or
not, as the case may be), whether as the result of an incident referred
to him or otherwise shall be final;
(f) Citing Commissioners shall be in attendance at the Match for which
they are appointed to act as Citing Commissioner save in
circumstances where a suitably qualified and independent Citing
Commissioner Liaison Officer is in attendance at the Match and is
able to provide the Citing Commissioner with the relevant
information and back-up required in accordance with the applicable
timeframes to allow the Citing Commissioner to discharge his duties
in accordance with this Regulation 17

 

[Bryan]

I've sat beside a TMO (recently) and he focussed hard when ball in 22 and relaxed when ball was between 22s.

Agree wholeheartedly! Once the lineout or scrum is 5m out, you're on your toes anticipating to make the call; when the kicking game is on, it's sit back, drink your cherry cola, and spot the pair of sweet cannons in the crowd if the non-TV cameras are zooming in!

As for the protocol for foul play and the TMO, I'm undecided. I like the idea of the referee referring incidents of foul play to spot numbers, but NOT to recommend a sanction. This means that the referee should only refer to the TMO when they have spotted foul play but can't identify an offender. Asking the TMO whether foul play had occurred is not something I'd be happy being referred to the TMO.

A lot of what is done on the pitch is down to feel and context, which I only believe can be acheived by actually being at ground level. Do I think that blatant eye-gouging should go unpunished? Of course not.

My big concern is for the marginal calls (taken out in the air intentionally or going for the ball?) that are best left to the referees. They are in the middle for a reason; referring the matter to the guy upstairs wastes time that I think could be better used.

The role of the TMO still falls into 2 schools of thought: make the decision that is within your protocol OR make the decision that is correct.

Bottom line: are you confident enough to step outside the protocol to do what is correct for the game and risk getting yanked by the IRB, or are you just going to stick to what the protocol document says...

I'm not convinced there are enough specialist TMOs out there that understand foul play within the context of the game, and I'm not convinced that referees won't use them as a crutch when they're in the weeds.

 

[Dickie E]

The incident was spotted by AR Stuart Dickinson

Bryce Lawrence, I think. Stuie was TMO.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Bryce Lawrence, I think. Stuie was TMO.

Yes you are quite correct.

I claim tiredness as an excuse. Three rugby tests on the trot starting at 7:30pm Saturday, and finishing in the wee small hours on Sunday.

 

[KML1]

I like the idea Ian, but cant see how it would work in practice. Had Bryce not spotted the gouging (and I can only assume he caught the end of it to only recommend a YC and not the TV feed I was watching in the pub) when would Stuart Dickinson have been able to feed a decision in? Have a proverbial TMO Flag in system? SOmething like the Formula 1 stewards investigation?

Didnt see the George Ayoub incident described here, but wasn't there a ruling allowing TMO to look more at FP around try scoring incidents? (or is that what you meant by it being in the field of play rather than in goal?