RugbyRebels

"Television match officials in the Premiership have been instructed to only intervene for the most “clear and obvious” forward passes due to the subjectivity of such decisions", says the DT. "Telegraph Sport understands that, since Sale’s win over Saracens in March – featuring a contentious forward pass in the lead-up to Sam James’s first-half try – the TMO protocols have been refined to advise the truck-dwelling officials to effectively ignore any pass that is marginal or debatable, given the multitude of factors at play when the ball is in the air."

So the laws are being re-written by stealth. Another reason why our game is changing for the worse. Eventually we''ll end up playing American football without the silly clothes - or maybe they'll be introduced too.

I’ve had my suspicions.

This seems overly paranoid to me. I think the Telegraph is stirring - hasn't it always been the case that the TMO will only advise on obvious forward passes because camera angles make it very difficult to judge marginal cases?

Puja

No problem with TMO's only intervening when passes are clearly and obviously forward. if its too close to call, then let the onfield officials make the decision.
My issue is that occasionally passes that do look to be pretty clearly forward are waved on.

I always wonder whether the TMO system only exists to cover for bad refereeing. And I don't mean mistakes.

A fit referee and two fit assistants (touch judges) are in the best position (one at least of the three should be in line with play) to judge forward passes. Leave them to it.

Amidst all the experiments why not try the obvious one - a season without TMOs. I'd go further and ban TV companies from showing replays till after the game. That is the time to review all disciplinary offences as well. We need to get back to referees fully accepting responsibility for applying the laws during the game without the safety net of TV referral. That could lead naturally to less mouthing by players, knowing that a ref's decision is final.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 7:58 am I always wonder whether the TMO system only exists to cover for bad refereeing. And I don't mean mistakes.

A fit referee and two fit assistants (touch judges) are in the best position (one at least of the three should be in line with play) to judge forward passes. Leave them to it.

Amidst all the experiments why not try the obvious one - a season without TMOs. I'd go further and ban TV companies from showing replays till after the game. That is the time to review all disciplinary offences as well. We need to get back to referees fully accepting responsibility for applying the laws during the game without the safety net of TV referral. That could lead naturally to less mouthing by players, knowing that a ref's decision is final.

We can’t have such a complicated game with intense scrutiny for officials/decisions, a million different camera angles and also a demand for player safety and quick, free-flowing entertainment. Something has to give.

You’d be tempted to say just let most of it slide unless it’s blatant, let the TMO watch back live for any serious red card offences etc, but that solves one problem and creates another.

My sense is that the same people who will send referees violent threats on social media over ‘ruining the game’ with stoppages and cards will be the same ones who do it when their team loses due to a minor infringement not being picked up.

Get rid of TMO's, save the game some money, speed it up.

I will note that I follow MLR in America and they have only recently got TMO in every game, so I've seen not having them recently. You would not believe the amount of anguish caused to fans by a try that is clearly, blatantly not scored - a ball dropped over the line, for example, where the referee could not see it on first view and awarded it. You think there's complaining about referees now, wait until a game is decided by a not given try when the stadium and tvs are showing replays of it clearly being grounded. Or, in one case, where the try was not given initially, the ref changed his mind after seeing a stadium replay, which did correct an egregious wrong call, but then he faced howls from the oppo supporters that he wasn't supposed to use the screen and should've stuck with his original wrong decision, not matter how obvious it was that he'd missed something.

Unless we want to take Oakboy's opinion and enforce television companies taking the viewing experience back to the 1980s by banning replays or analysis during the game, it's not feasible. I'd be in favour of greater controls, especially giving the TMO their own control of cameras and replays rather than the live feed so that we don't get French television deciding what needs reviewing, but getting rid of TMOs would be far worse than having them.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 9:28 am but getting rid of TMOs would be far worse than having them.

Puja

I don't agree, but as said before, the genie is out of the bottle. But rugby is not a game of perfect.

We could just have TMOs for the act of scoring if that’s the big issue/concern. Tbh, and iirc, it wasn’t too bad when they were first introduced but there has been mission creep. Hodnett would review a player picking their nose if she thought she could get away with it.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:03 am We could just have TMOs for the act of scoring if that’s the big issue/concern. Tbh, and iirc, it wasn’t too bad when they were first introduced but there has been mission creep. Hodnett would review a player picking their nose if she thought she could get away with it.

The issue with any lines is always the cases that lie along the edges. What about the blatant knock on at the base that happened before the try-scoring pass, etc. Very easy for mission creep to happen.

Agreed that they are too involved right now, but I am beggared if I know where the line should be. One thing which I would be in favour of is giving them authority to just recommend a decision to the ref - we don't need the conversation and back and forth and the negotiations between TMO and ref. Just "There was a high tackle, some mitgation for dropping, yellow card for 10 Saracens," and we're done without the ref having to meander casually down the pitch to go look at a screen.

Puja

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 9:45 am

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 9:28 am but getting rid of TMOs would be far worse than having them.

Puja

I don't agree, but as said before, the genie is out of the bottle. But rugby is not a game of perfect.

Perfect might not be attainable, but better certainly is and shouldn't be given up on.

Puja

The issue for me is that players are constantly pushing the boundaries, It's almost 'what can I get away with creep'. Offside, big hits, off the ball stuff , crossing, blocking, flat/forward passes, and without a TMO to keep all of that in check (as the three officials on the turf seeing it in real time are not able to sanction or have the minerals to call out) these traits would continue. I do get very annoyed by passes that are obviously forwards and not brought back, that is one of the fundamentals that makes rugby rugby. I am not wholly unhappy with TMO's but think an advisory capacity in anything other than foul/dangerous play and checking acts verifying a try being scored is sensible. I'd like to see forward passes policed better.

Surely, as I said earlier, it would be a simple experiment to trial 'no TMOs' and go from there. Theorising is just that. Until its tried in the current scene we can't KNOW. How much are games really affected in terms of results? How much is it hampering referees from honing their skill/judgement? Etc.

If everything gets worse, expand the TMOs' role. If everything gets better scrap them.

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:55 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:03 am We could just have TMOs for the act of scoring if that’s the big issue/concern. Tbh, and iirc, it wasn’t too bad when they were first introduced but there has been mission creep. Hodnett would review a player picking their nose if she thought she could get away with it.

The issue with any lines is always the cases that lie along the edges. What about the blatant knock on at the base that happened before the try-scoring pass, etc. Very easy for mission creep to happen.

Agreed that they are too involved right now, but I am beggared if I know where the line should be. One thing which I would be in favour of is giving them authority to just recommend a decision to the ref - we don't need the conversation and back and forth and the negotiations between TMO and ref. Just "There was a high tackle, some mitgation for dropping, yellow card for 10 Saracens," and we're done without the ref having to meander casually down the pitch to go look at a screen.

Puja

‘In the act of scoring a try’ will stop the mission creep. Refs will make mistakes, as players do, and if TMOs are required a hard line with only a very limited remit should be installed, imo.

I’m torn on TMO intervention for dangerous play, part of me thinks it should be dealt with after the game, but if it continues it does, as you say, need to be an instruction from the TMO rather than convening a 5min debate.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:28 am Surely, as I said earlier, it would be a simple experiment to trial 'no TMOs' and go from there. Theorising is just that. Until its tried in the current scene we can't KNOW. How much are games really affected in terms of results? How much is it hampering referees from honing their skill/judgement? Etc.

If everything gets worse, expand the TMOs' role. If everything gets better scrap them.

Is the game really that different from the 1/2/3 seasons prior to TMOs?

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:56 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 9:45 am

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 9:28 am but getting rid of TMOs would be far worse than having them.

Puja

I don't agree, but as said before, the genie is out of the bottle. But rugby is not a game of perfect.

Perfect might not be attainable, but better certainly is and shouldn't be given up on.

Puja

Fair. But I don't think TMO's have made the game better.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:58 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:28 am Surely, as I said earlier, it would be a simple experiment to trial 'no TMOs' and go from there. Theorising is just that. Until its tried in the current scene we can't KNOW. How much are games really affected in terms of results? How much is it hampering referees from honing their skill/judgement? Etc.

If everything gets worse, expand the TMOs' role. If everything gets better scrap them.

Is the game really that different from the 1/2/3 seasons prior to TMOs?

It certainly takes a lot longer to complete.

TBH my annoyance with TMO's comes from the mission creep and associated randomness.

One thing which I have wondered, upon watching the blatant disregard for the offside line perpetrated week-on-week, is whether it would be possible to have some sort of Hawkeye system in place for rugby. It would be a very hard computing problem and would need to be working in a timescale of mere seconds to be at all useful, but it was be a literal game-changer if we could automate policing of the offside line. Might be chaos for a couple of games as players relearned where the back foot of the ruck actually was, but it would open up a hell of a lot more room for attack.

Puja

Banquo wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:09 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:58 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:28 am Surely, as I said earlier, it would be a simple experiment to trial 'no TMOs' and go from there. Theorising is just that. Until its tried in the current scene we can't KNOW. How much are games really affected in terms of results? How much is it hampering referees from honing their skill/judgement? Etc.

If everything gets worse, expand the TMOs' role. If everything gets better scrap them.

Is the game really that different from the 1/2/3 seasons prior to TMOs?

It certainly takes a lot longer to complete.

TBH my annoyance with TMO's comes from the mission creep and associated randomness.

Completely agree. What I meant was if the game was played so significantly differently now that we don’t know what it looks like without TMOs. I doesn’t, for me, so why trial no TMOs. Either do it or don’t.

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:13 pm One thing which I have wondered, upon watching the blatant disregard for the offside line perpetrated week-on-week, is whether it would be possible to have some sort of Hawkeye system in place for rugby. It would be a very hard computing problem and would need to be working in a timescale of mere seconds to be at all useful, but it was be a literal game-changer if we could automate policing of the offside line. Might be chaos for a couple of games as players relearned where the back foot of the ruck actually was, but it would open up a hell of a lot more room for attack.

Puja

Wayne Barnes is adamant that persistent off side from the d line is not an issue. He claims they have checked after matches and it is very rarely missed.
I’m inclined to disagree but…

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:13 pm One thing which I have wondered, upon watching the blatant disregard for the offside line perpetrated week-on-week, is whether it would be possible to have some sort of Hawkeye system in place for rugby. It would be a very hard computing problem and would need to be working in a timescale of mere seconds to be at all useful, but it was be a literal game-changer if we could automate policing of the offside line. Might be chaos for a couple of games as players relearned where the back foot of the ruck actually was, but it would open up a hell of a lot more room for attack.

Puja

What about some sort of lazer system/robot that physically zaps and mutilates the players if they cross it? Like the good old days.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:57 am

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:55 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 10:03 am We could just have TMOs for the act of scoring if that’s the big issue/concern. Tbh, and iirc, it wasn’t too bad when they were first introduced but there has been mission creep. Hodnett would review a player picking their nose if she thought she could get away with it.

The issue with any lines is always the cases that lie along the edges. What about the blatant knock on at the base that happened before the try-scoring pass, etc. Very easy for mission creep to happen.

Agreed that they are too involved right now, but I am beggared if I know where the line should be. One thing which I would be in favour of is giving them authority to just recommend a decision to the ref - we don't need the conversation and back and forth and the negotiations between TMO and ref. Just "There was a high tackle, some mitgation for dropping, yellow card for 10 Saracens," and we're done without the ref having to meander casually down the pitch to go look at a screen.

Puja

‘In the act of scoring a try’ will stop the mission creep. Refs will make mistakes, as players do, and if TMOs are required a hard line with only a very limited remit should be installed, imo.

I’m torn on TMO intervention for dangerous play, part of me thinks it should be dealt with after the game, but if it continues it does, as you say, need to be an instruction from the TMO rather than convening a 5min debate.

I remember the Leicester vs Northampton semi-final before TMOs were allowed to intervene on foul play, where Tuilagi got a yellow instead of a red for punching Ashton in the face, and Ashton got a yellow because he had been punched in the face. Everyone could see it was the wrong decision once the replays were shown, but the TMO wasn't allowed to intervene.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 11:28 am Surely, as I said earlier, it would be a simple experiment to trial 'no TMOs' and go from there. Theorising is just that. Until its tried in the current scene we can't KNOW. How much are games really affected in terms of results? How much is it hampering referees from honing their skill/judgement? Etc.

If everything gets worse, expand the TMOs' role. If everything gets better scrap them.

I do think people have forgotten what it was like without TMOs. Sure, I also hate the fireside chats between the officials and the 400 angles and the 20 minutes of deliberation, but we can reduce those without losing the phenomenal improvement in accuracy that we've gained. A ref is only human and there's no call to humiliate them by making an obvious mistake change the course of a game or a world cup, when we can easily get it right by giving them the help of a replay every now and again.

Rugby isn't perfect and refereeing will never be perfect. But I think it'd be an act of monumental self-harm to actively move away from accuracy.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:16 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:13 pm One thing which I have wondered, upon watching the blatant disregard for the offside line perpetrated week-on-week, is whether it would be possible to have some sort of Hawkeye system in place for rugby. It would be a very hard computing problem and would need to be working in a timescale of mere seconds to be at all useful, but it was be a literal game-changer if we could automate policing of the offside line. Might be chaos for a couple of games as players relearned where the back foot of the ruck actually was, but it would open up a hell of a lot more room for attack.

Puja

Wayne Barnes is adamant that persistent off side from the d line is not an issue. He claims they have checked after matches and it is very rarely missed.
I’m inclined to disagree but…

That startles me. I'd imagine he's probably right in terms of players choosing their moment to charge up, but I very rarely see defensive lines sitting properly behind where the actual back foot of the ruck is.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 12:13 pm One thing which I have wondered, upon watching the blatant disregard for the offside line perpetrated week-on-week, is whether it would be possible to have some sort of Hawkeye system in place for rugby. It would be a very hard computing problem and would need to be working in a timescale of mere seconds to be at all useful, but it was be a literal game-changer if we could automate policing of the offside line. Might be chaos for a couple of games as players relearned where the back foot of the ruck actually was, but it would open up a hell of a lot more room for attack.

Puja

It's a decent call, and I'm not sure it would be all that hard of a computing problem - they're already all wearing high-accuracy GPS trackers after all (ETA: though yes, "where's the back foot" would be a bugger to program).

Same could potentially be useful for forward passes; as it would know the position and momentum for each player.