Time wasting in the test match
There was a lot of time wasting on the weekend in the Wallabies v France test and I’m not talking about the players.
When I was looking at the Top 14 a few years ago I said in the forum that that they used an IRB dispensation to use the TMO to judge on forward passes, knock-ons and the like and that it should be used for all pro rugby games. People said it would take too much time and I said no, it didn’t: they decided things quickly.
They did too. But when the officials of the other competitions got their hands on it they butchered the process by going to the TMO more often than the French referees did and each intervention took longer.
Now the French referees in the Top 14 take just as long as anyone else.
I think referees are concerned they will be marked down if they don’t use it more often and they stack in too many questions also.
And they ask questions of the TMO that predicates an outcome so the TMO agrees.
Super Hooper – but don’t forget the tip
Incident One — the Hooper try
Full marks to Kiwi Ben Skeene, the TMO at Suncorp the other night, for going against the trend and suggesting his own outcome for the Hooper try in the 33rd minute. I think he got it wrong but I liked the attitude.
I think he got it wrong because Mr. B. Freddy could (a) see that the ball went slightly forward in relation to the ground and could (b) notice that Mr. T. Kuridrani was traveling at half snail pace and could not tip the ball over to Mr. M. Hooper slightly forward, but for a knock-on.
I got that right in five seconds after the first clip started I reckon, but it took them 1 min 56 secs to get it wrong.
Incident Two – The Toomua try
When Rob Simmons took the ball up and got tackled by Bernard le Roux, fullback Hugo Bonneval did the only notable thing he did the whole game. He turned the ball over beautifully and handed off to Maxime Machenaud who was responsible for the sad comedy of Felix le Bourhis stuffing up in his first test match.
The happy Matt Toomua – but was it a try?
But did the Frenchman ground the ball on the line?
In the shot to the right you can see le Bourhis with his fingers on the ball and the ball on the goal line. It wasn’t an optical illusion either because you can see in the slow motion replay from another angle the moment of the photo. His fingers are on the ball as it straightens a bit on the goal line.
Was there “downward pressure” as idiot commentators keep harping on about? The laws don’t mention downward pressure they mention grounding.
What is grounding? Well if le Bourhis had touched a metal rugby ball touching a metal spot on the ground with a lot of amperage going through both, his hair would have stood out sideways because he and the ball were grounded alright.
At least it took only 1 min 30 secs to get that one wrong.
Incident Three — the Michalak offside
They took almost five minutes to get this one wrong. One of the few things the commentators got right on these replays was that the red boot of Yoann Huget marked the offside line. It didn’t matter that he was on the ground then: he had once been in a ruck in contact with somebody over the ball.
Michalak retreated to get on or behind the offside line. He had to turn and he had his left foot forward when Ashley-Cooper contacted him going for the try. The foot was not behind or on the offside line.
But one foot was OK wasn’t it, and that’s fine right? Wrong; both feet have to be behind or on the offside line (well, according to a fellow who trains referees in Warwickshire.)
But whether it’s right or wrong is not my point: it’s that it took almost five minutes. They showed all the camera shots: they had more angles than a soap opera, which it virtually was. Five minutes.
You think I was wrong three times? Maybe you’re right, but don’t spoil a good story—or even a bad one.
