• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Wallabies v Ireland, Saturday 16th June, 8.00pm, AAMI Park, Melbourne

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dismal Pillock

Michael Lynagh (62)
Secret Dive-Ball cartel in the Mod-box?
unlikely, iHomo. hazarding a guess theyre fretting some pied piper prick is trying to poach eyeballs or some other myopically fraught matronly jackbooted anti-life gestapo horseshit.
I've said it before but I'll say it again, you'd SWEAR some people think they're getting out of this one alive.
 

formerflanker

Ken Catchpole (46)
Of course, The Silver Frown quickly **DELETED** this article.

Crime against humanity etc etc

actually I am completely fucked if I know why

What a brilliant point. The reason fans go to games is to watch tries being scored. The TMO and ref now make fans wait many minutes before the try is allowed or disallowed, taking all fun out of the reason for turning up in the first place.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
They are damned if they use the TMO and damned if they don't.


Hypothetical question. The Bledisloe is tied one game all, in the final game we are a couple of points behind, and get over the AB line in injury time. The replay shows that a try should have been awarded, however, the Referee and ARs are unsighted and there is no TMO any more.


I will vote to keep TMOs. Maybe the technology will be improved - it usually can.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
Yeah it's not the technology, it's the amount of time they spend pondering on petty decisions. Keep it, but use it for try/no try confirmation only, and for red cardable foul play incidents i.e. like the Hall one on the weekend, mandatory check to see if was intentional.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
They are damned if they use the TMO and damned if they don't.


Hypothetical question. The Bledisloe is tied one game all, in the final game we are a couple of points behind, and get over the AB line in injury time. The replay shows that a try should have been awarded, however, the Referee and ARs are unsighted and there is no TMO any more.


I will vote to keep TMOs. Maybe the technology will be improved - it usually can.
I don't think that's a very strong argument. It's an extreme example.

Sure that COULD be a negative outcome of drastically reduced TMO interference. On the other hand, 99.9% of the time the decisions won't have that impact.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Really? I thought the card was fairly clear-cut. It came on the back of a few consecutive Irish infringements, was in their half, and very cynical.
.

No more cynical that us killing the ball every time they were on our goal line. Pocock at least 3 times.

They were never warned by the ref for consecutive infringements, but we were three times and yet they get the card?

I completely disagree with the card that Ireland received and you'll never convince me that it was anything other than a penalty.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
They are damned if they use the TMO and damned if they don't.


Hypothetical question. The Bledisloe is tied one game all, in the final game we are a couple of points behind, and get over the AB line in injury time. The replay shows that a try should have been awarded, however, the Referee and ARs are unsighted and there is no TMO any more.


I will vote to keep TMOs. Maybe the technology will be improved - it usually can.

The TMO would also most likely be unsighted in these situations.

And to continue your hypothetical ponderings, at the conclusion of the game we could not declare a result. Every test match decided by less that 14 point we could have the TMO go through the whole 80 minutes and review every decision and non-decision. Ref gave an incorrect penalty for offside in the 8th minute, Wallabies kicked for touch and scored from the maul so we'll tack that try back, In the 14th minute there was a scrum awarded to the Wallabies but it should have gone to the ABs. 8 phases later the Wallabies scored so we'll take that try back to. And on and on we could go. We could then refer the game to WR (World Rugby) for an adjudication and they could decide which points stand and which don't and even award points where teams could have scored but for an incorrect decision and give 3 points for every kickable penalty goal where no penalty was awarded etc.

We might have a result within 5 days of the test (subject to appeal to the Court for Abritration in Sport). We might even have perfection, but we'd have nobody watching anymore.

Part of the appeal of sport is the instantaneous and spontaneous sequence of events - particularly the big moments in games. The highs and lows experienced by fans is what brings them back every week. Indeed talking about some of these calls can go on for years and pass into folklore. The Kiwis still talk about a no-try against Wales in 1905. Anyone who has played, coached or watched rugby for any length of time could give examples of bad calls costing them a match. Life's like that.

I've never met anyone who stopped watching sport because a dud decision went against them. I can give you the names of a few who've stopped watching because it's boring.

EDIT: And I'd also point out I'm in favour of the TMO being used to adjudicate the actual act of scoring a try as was originally envisaged - and this would mean that your hypothetical scenario would be covered (assuming that the TMO could see anything). I don't think that anybody has suggested taking the TMO out of this type of situation.
 

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
So why did we need the TMO review?
I agree. Unfortunately I feel we have put officials in a ‘no win’ situation. The only thing people complain about more than the incessant delays with the video ref is the number of perceived mistakes the officials make.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
I agree. Unfortunately I feel we have put officials in a ‘no win’ situation. The only thing people complain about more than the incessant delays with the video ref is the number of perceived mistakes the officials make.

My suspicion is that as the more experienced referee, Gauziere came on and told Williams to check it. It was an injury break and Phipps in particular was complaining loudly.

This is another of the problems with the extra TMO involvement - players in the heat of battle pile pressure on the ref to check something in the hope of a favourable outcome.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Club rugby gets on okay without TMOs at all, which proves nothing much, other than that club rugby should be mostly an enjoyable pastime, with no lives lost and no cattle stations won and lost.

It seems to me that at the elite level, where cattle stations are won and lost, either we do away with video reviews totally, otherwise we put up with delays. It would be impossible to legislate for any rationalisation of the time that is taken. Partly because of human frailty, partly because of the limitations of technology.

I know people who have given up watching the game because of scrum restarts. Maybe we should do away with scrums.
 

KevinO

Geoff Shaw (53)
Make it like other sports, captain has 2 referrals and that's it. Ref makes the call on the field and they only use the TMO when the captain thinks his wrong.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

William88

Syd Malcolm (24)
At least rugby referees make some decisions.

Rugby league sends every decision up to the TMO or bunker as they call it.

It’s not perfect, buts it’s probably the best we will have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top