Depends on who’s in charge of the footage at the game I suppose. I hardly doubt the home team is going to replay some contentious shit on the big screen if it happens to be them infringing. It’s a bit different if the ref or tmo asks for it.
Stan couldn't give a shit about the Waratahs. This isn't a French TV director situation
The home "team" does not control the footage. Some peanut at the ground does. Ultimately it will come down to what footage the broadcaster has. It looks pretty damning from that view but I have no doubt they'll contest it if that's what the judiciary rely on. Every team would.
No, it wasn't replayed, but the TMO has access to all the camera angles/feeds. They're not restricted to the broadcast cuts (this is why you see issues like in the Brumbies game where the TMO had clearly noted a knock on leading up to a try, but was struggling to get the broadcaster to replay the correct footage for the referee). Considering it was a hit on a player who'd literately just kicked a ball, I doubt there wasn't still a camera or two tracking Strachan so there will be other camera angles of the incident which will be used when the incident is judged to see if it meets the red card threshold or not.
The camera work/production is likely happening by whichever company Stan outsources to (a NEP style company or someone similar). The broadcaster cut we see is not the same as all the footage that would have been captured by the cameras on the night. Most modern/professional sporting teams access the extra non-broadcast footage when they can for analysis reasons.
This isn't a direct response to your post but the topic has changed so I'm just using yours to go back to this subject.
Agreed. I much prefer it to another predominately blue team, which is a dominate colour for so many.
I believe maul rules are a point of discussion that’s come up on a few occasions when WR (World Rugby) meets with reps from various nations, so you’re not alone in wanting clarity.
If the only footage available is the one I have seen then nothing SHOULD happen either. I'm happy to assess any other footage on its merits but no way can they find him guilty on that footage alone.
Potential yellow card worthy late hit. But without something more conclusive that’s all it should be.
You'd hope so because if they manage to convict him on that one only it's peak WR (World Rugby) farcical.
Sure but they don't have a close up camera feed on every player, it was off the ball after the ball had been kicked. All the camera operators would've likely moved to another area of the game (the ball in the air, the kick reception etc.)
