The role of the TMO

Steve Perchance

Just watching the highlights of the Munster game, and the ref went to the TMO for forward passes, both of which were marginal. This follows on from the farce of the Ulster game a few weeks ago.

It seems to me that many of the criticisms of the video ref are happening, i.e. the referees are afraid to make a decision without checking first ,just in case, slowing the game and taking something away from the sport - contentious calls are part of the drama after all

Personally, I think it would be better to go to a challenge system rather than the current one. Give each team x number of calls for things like blocking or forward passes. If they run out and the ref doesnt see it, tough. Referees then have to decide again. Leave the current powers with the ref for foul play and for groundings.

P_1

It is getting a bit like League and NFL with the pedantic checking alright

Hagz

I think the ref should be restricted to the final pass prior to a try. Enough of this going all the way back to 3/4 passes prior to the try. And to be honest I would just get rid of the TMO for dangerous play. We were fine without it.

Cosmo Kramer

Connacht's second try was chalked off based on a suspect forward pass decision 80 yards back the field 45 seconds earlier. After two minutes looking at replays the TMO basically just went with the home team because the replays were hopelessly inconclusive. The new TMO rules definitely need to be looked at again.

danthefan

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Connacht's second try was chalked off based on a suspect forward pass decision 80 yards back the field 45 seconds earlier. After two minutes looking at replays the TMO basically just went with the home team because the replays were hopelessly inconclusive. The new TMO rules definitely need to be looked at again.

This drives me absolutely mental. If you have to look at a pass a million times to check if it's forward - it's because it probably isn't bloody well forward! Even looking at the TMO footage I have no idea what pass went forward, everything looked fine to me.

Hagz

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Connacht's second try was chalked off based on a suspect forward pass decision 80 yards back the field 45 seconds earlier. After two minutes looking at replays the TMO basically just went with the home team because the replays were hopelessly inconclusive. The new TMO rules definitely need to be looked at again.

Wut? Are you talking about where Toulouse knocked on and then a Connacht player knocked on?? That was the complete right call. It sucks that they were able to go all the way back down the pitch, but it was the right call.

Steve Perchance

danthefan wrote: »

This drives me absolutely mental. If you have to look at a pass a million times to check if it's forward - it's because it probably isn't bloody well forward! Even looking at the TMO footage I have no idea what pass went forward, everything looked fine to me.

Definitely. Depends on the ref too - in the game v the all blacks, owens asked was there a 'clear and obvious' forward pass. If it doesnt meet that criteria, then its flat, play on

Judgement Day

All of the above +100. It will be soon be going back to check video footage on the team bus to see if anyone was drinking anything iffy.

Grimebox

Its slightly irritating how often the TMO was used today, but its 100% necessary. I'd way prefer to have TMO called for everything than blatant foul play being rewarded once.

Cosmo Kramer

Sorry, yes - a knock on rather than a forward pass. For me the replays weren't at all conclusive. It didn't matter in the end (other than Toulouse might not have got the LBP) but that's not the point.

Hagz

Ah I thought it was fairly conclusive to be honest. Once they showed the right angle you could see it went forward. But as you say it doesn't matter now.

Dravokivich

Its not the tmo i'd have a problem with. If a ref feels they've to turn to it so often, it be the ref I'd be concerned about. Id see it as a confidence issue, more so than a verification process that I thought it was meant to be.

Swiwi.

danthefan wrote: »

This drives me absolutely mental. If you have to look at a pass a million times to check if it's forward - it's because it probably isn't bloody well forward! Even looking at the TMO footage I have no idea what pass went forward, everything looked fine to me.

Yeah, it's swung too much. It should be CLEARLY & OBVIOUSLY forward on the first viewing. If not, then try awarded and back to the rugby we go.

Too much TMO this year - however I do want the TMO to stay, Wales would not have got their try against Ireland a while back if the TMO had been in use.

19543261

Grimebox wrote: »

Its slightly irritating how often the TMO was used today, but its 100% necessary. I'd way prefer to have TMO called for everything than blatant foul play being rewarded once.

Same here. I wasnt irritated, even.

I think when it comes to scoring a try or possible card offense, the officials have to be pedantic. If one or to minutes are the cost for greater accuracy, then it's a small one.

.ak

I always thought a challenge system, like in Tennis, would be best suited to the new rules.

Dravokivich

.ak wrote: »

I always thought a challenge system, like in Tennis, would be best suited to the new rules.

I dunno man, a limit on challenges can be manipulated by opposing teams. I feel that the use of tmo should be ref descretion. But perhaps guidelines towards their use throughout the match.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience

TMO system we had before was perfect imo. Now you have at least 3 or 4 more stoppages in each game and when you consider how important fluidity is to the entertainment value of a rugby game I think it's safe to say these extra responsibilities should be binned.

Sure there will be one or two big calls that go ignored but that's the nature of the beast

Artful_Badger

I think its fine the way it is tbh, nothing wrong with checking these things. I dont understand how restricting it would do anything but revert back to how it was before, we'd be back to nonsense rules like the tmo not being able to comment on clear infringements and the ref not being able to ask. The ref either has the ability to check what he's unsure of or he doesnt. And I think its better if he does.

19543261

I dont think the flow of the game is justification for the wrong scoreline at the end of the game.

ScissorPaperRock

I don't have a huge problem with the way it is. Sure it can be a little tedious and frustrating, but it's a trade-off I'm willing to make to ensure the right calls are being made. I'd rather give up a few minutes in each match for the TMO than feel like an incorrect call cost one or two matches in the season.

They could probably tone it back a bit, because at the moment they seem to check nearly every try, but I don't think it needs any major overhauling.

sydthebeat

id love to know what percentages of this weekends trys went to TMO decision, it seemed to be about 50% which would be ridiculous.
We had the farce yesterday where leighton hodges held up the game for possibly 3 minutes trying to describe to the TMO what phase of play he wanted to see a suspected illegal rucking...
as was said at the time, most people could get back their sky ~+ within seconds yet the TMO crew couldn't locate what the ref was talking about... it was fine rucking anyway. That kind of crap has to stop... there's 3 pairs of eyes watching the play in real time, surely one pair can pick up something which is obviously dangerous.

Taco Corp

am I right in saying the in league, forward passes do not fall under the remit of TMO?

.ak

Captain_Hindsight wrote: »

am I right in saying the in league, forward passes do not fall under the remit of TMO?

The pro12? Yep, they do (I'm fairly sure)

BeardySi

Pretty sure he meant Rugby League, not in the league...

Love the new av .ak!

LuckyLloyd

19543261 wrote: »

I dont think the flow of the game is justification for the wrong scoreline at the end of the game.

Rugby setting the standard here imo. This approach will lead to unprecedented accuracy.

Steve Perchance

19543261 wrote: »

I dont think the flow of the game is justification for the wrong scoreline at the end of the game.

The thing is though, at elite levels where the TMO exists, the flow of the game does matter. Its supposed to be entertaining, and if it isn't, we lose fans and the growth of the sport suffers.

Most referees make good decisions the majority of the time. If we allow a culture to develop such that every referee needs to check every decision in case one of the 10 angles shows he was wrong, it weakens the decision making of referees and the respect they should be afforded, and detracts from the spectacle. Both are avoidable by toning it back.

Bad decisions suck if they're against your team but they are part of what makes sport great too. Look at the forward pass that knocked out the allblacks or warburtons red card in the world cup - these things can be frustrating but they at least keep it interesting

Dravokivich

Steve Perchance wrote: »

The thing is though, at elite levels where the TMO exists, the flow of the game does matter. Its supposed to be entertaining, and if it isn't, we lose fans and the growth of the sport suffers.

Most referees make good decisions the majority of the time. If we allow a culture to develop such that every referee needs to check every decision in case one of the 10 angles shows he was wrong, it weakens the decision making of referees and the respect they should be afforded, and detracts from the spectacle. Both are avoidable by toning it back.

Bad decisions suck if they're against your team but they are part of what makes sport great too. Look at the forward pass that knocked out the allblacks or warburtons red card in the world cup - these things can be frustrating but they at least keep it interesting

The issue here is with confidence in the Referee. Not the availability of the TMO. Well, that's my take on it from the earlier part of the Top14 this season.

I don't accept the comment that "in sport we should just take the bad decisions." They don't make the sport exciting. Its the most frustrating thing about watching any type of game.

P_1

Captain_Hindsight wrote: »

am I right in saying the in league, forward passes do not fall under the remit of TMO?

They check everything in League from what I recall

Taco Corp

Treadhead wrote: »

Pretty sure he meant Rugby League, not in the league...

Love the new av .ak!

yeah, I meant rugby league. I vaguely remember it being mentioned in a league game I watched a few years ago. will try and find something on it

Steve Perchance

Dravokivich wrote: »

The issue here is with confidence in the Referee. Not the availability of the TMO. Well, that's my take on it from the earlier part of the Top14 this season.

I don't accept the comment that "in sport we should just take the bad decisions." They don't make the sport exciting. Its the most frustrating thing about watching any type of game.

Thats my point though. If the TMO use gets out of hand, confidence in the referee is eroded. A lot of referee decisions are judgement calls. If a referee could use the video and instead makes a decision, and is then shown to be wrong, he'd be vilified. As a result, we'll end up with everything thats not 100% certain being checked just in case, if we dont rein it in now. Thats not good for the game.

At all levels of rugby, bad decisions happen for and against you, and you just suck it up and move on. Its part of the respect for officials, and backed up by the laws which say the referee is the sole adjudicator of how the laws are applied. Its just at the very top that this is being called into question. It's supposed to be an aid to referees but is quickly becoming a crutch for bad ones and weakens confidence even in the good ones.

LuckyLloyd

A pass going forward or back isn't a 'judgement call'. You can see whether someone threw a ball backwards or flat or forwards.

A player's run being impeded just after he kicked it on and whether he was obstructed or fairly tackled is an example of a 'judgement call'.

What happens at lower levels of the game isn't really relevant. The stakes are much higher at the Heineken Cup / Test Match level and every effort should be made to ensure a higher accuracy of result too.

Dravokivich

Steve Perchance wrote: »

Thats my point though. If the TMO use gets out of hand, confidence in the referee is eroded. A lot of referee decisions are judgement calls. If a referee could use the video and instead makes a decision, and is then shown to be wrong, he'd be vilified. As a result, we'll end up with everything thats not 100% certain being checked just in case, if we dont rein it in now. Thats not good for the game.

At all levels of rugby, bad decisions happen for and against you, and you just suck it up and move on. Its part of the respect for officials, and backed up by the laws which say the referee is the sole adjudicator of how the laws are applied. Its just at the very top that this is being called into question. It's supposed to be an aid to referees but is quickly becoming a crutch for bad ones and weakens confidence even in the good ones.

A lot of it depends on the referee and how they uses it. Referees have been played by teams before. That hasn't looked like changing with the increased availability of TMO.

The TMO doesn't have to mean a diminishing sense of respect for officials either. There were problems with scrums and they got revised. Any issues with over use of the TMO will certainly be looked into by the IRB if it breaks up the game too much, or makes the referees little more than a glorified witness to a match.

All we are seeing now, is how inconsistent a lot of the prominent referees can be. Along with how uncomfortable some are at judging a match.

Steve Perchance

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

A pass going forward or back isn't a 'judgement call'. You can see whether someone threw a ball backwards or flat or forwards.

A player's run being impeded just after he kicked it on and whether he was obstructed or fairly tackled is an example of a 'judgement call'.

What happens at lower levels of the game isn't really relevant. The stakes are much higher at the Heineken Cup / Test Match level and every effort should be made to ensure a higher accuracy of result too.

A forward pass very much can be a judgement call - the difference between flat and forward can be tiny, and with momentum, its harder again to judge, as its the movement of the hands not the flight of the ball that matter Even with video its not conclusive every time. And the closer the call, the more time it takes.

The stakes are higher at test level but I think its already becoming a problem - the stakes are causing the use of the TMO because referees are afraid to make a mistake. Accuracy cant come at the expense of the overall product. Like I said before, the early pattern is there and its getting more and more prevalent - they should be looking to take it back a notch now before it gets so bad that its really hurting the sport.

This could take the form of a challenge system, a strict review of usage by the referee's assessors so that excessive unnecessary use has consequences for that ref, or limiting the TMO back to groundings, foul play and exceptional occurences like the phillips try in the six nations. But they should be looking to do something once this season finishes.

Steve Perchance

Dravokivich wrote: »

A lot of it depends on the referee and how they uses it. Referees have been played by teams before. That hasn't looked like changing with the increased availability of TMO.

The TMO doesn't have to mean a diminishing sense of respect for officials either. There were problems with scrums and they got revised. Any issues with over use of the TMO will certainly be looked into by the IRB if it breaks up the game too much, or makes the referees little more than a glorified witness to a match.

All we are seeing now, is how inconsistent a lot of the prominent referees can be. Along with how uncomfortable some are at judging a match.

It does undermine though, there was already an incident where Jean de Villiers browbeat a ref into checking the video against the all blacks this year.

I'm just saying the IRB should be looking at it now - the scrum issue was allowed to get as bad as it did because they didnt just address it up front, when everyone was saying it was a problem.

Games are already being broken up too much, and to my eye, theres been a noticable increase in usage of the TMO as the season has gone on. Why wait for the game to be damaged before we make changes?

Turtwig

The problem with the tmo is that camera angles are insufficient. Just implement a hawk eye type system for passes allowing for a deviation of a couple of cm and be done with it. Currently the system has a forward pass on one angle and flat on another only and the conclusive angle is not available.

errlloyd

Maybe the TMO should be live. Like while watching the game on TV he should be actively reviewing things that are dodge and should be able to give his opinion instantly or at least be already looking at the tape when he gets asked.

Other than that I think refs should just use common sense and trust their judgement a little more.

LeinsterDub

Jernal wrote: »

The problem with the tmo is that camera angles are insufficient. Just implement a hawk eye type system for passes allowing for a deviation of a couple of cm and be done with it. Currently the system has a forward pass on one angle and flat on another only and the conclusive angle is not available.

That is impossible with today's technology.

awec

The touch judges now just exist to tell the referee to go to the TMO.

The Ulster incident against Zebre was a farce. Touch judge told the ref to go to the TMO, the TMO looked at two seperate incidents about 8 times each and neither of them were the incident in question. And then the ref went and gave a penalty anyway. If he was happy to give a penalty without seeing the incident why not just give it rather than waste 5 minutes?!

Riskymove

awec wrote: »

The touch judges now just exist to tell the referee to go to the TMO.

yeah its a farce.

the pass in question for the disallowed Earls try occurred right in front of the touch judge, yet he could not make a call

Artful_Badger

Riskymove wrote: »

yeah its a farce.

the pass in question for the disallowed Earls try occurred right in front of the touch judge, yet he could not make a call

And if he called it forward without checking with the tmo it would be a different kind of farce, "all the technology and he ignores it" etc. There is nothing wrong with TJ/refs avoiding judgement calls when they have the ability to check with the tmo to make sure.

There's gonna be the odd farce anyway but at least as it is now the farce's are gonna be fewer and generally non game changing. It will take a while to settle into it.

Riskymove

Artful_Badger wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with TJ/refs avoiding judgement calls when they have the ability to check with the tmo to make sure.

nothing worng with a ref avoiding a judgment call?


on that logic pretty soon more and more will be up to TMO and games will take 2 hours

Artful_Badger

Riskymove wrote: »

nothing worng with a ref avoiding a judgment call?


on that logic pretty soon more and more will be up to TMO and games will take 2 hours

So ignore the tmo and just flip a coin in terms of awarding/not awarding tries ? The tmo is there for a reason and has been there for quite a while, you think refs and TJ/s should make judgement calls rather than use the tmo to be clear as to whether or not the try should stand ?

Why not flip a coin to see who wins, save loads of time

Turtwig

Riskymove wrote: »

nothing worng with a ref avoiding a judgment call?


on that logic pretty soon more and more will be up to TMO and games will take 2 hours

No actually the logic states that in particular instances there's nothing wrong with a ref asking for a second opinion. You're sliding all the way to the assumption that refs won't make any judgement calls now.

Steve Perchance

Artful_Badger wrote: »

And if he called it forward without checking with the tmo it would be a different kind of farce, "all the technology and he ignores it" etc. There is nothing wrong with TJ/refs avoiding judgement calls when they have the ability to check with the tmo to make sure.

There's gonna be the odd farce anyway but at least as it is now the farce's are gonna be fewer and generally non game changing. It will take a while to settle into it.

I dont agree. There is something wrong with refs avoiding judgement calls. Especially if it keeps going the way it has been and it becomes most calls.

These reviews take time from the game, allowing momentum shifts to be stifled and hurting the spectacle for fans, particularly those at the game. A line needs to be drawn somewhere - otherwise we'll end up with an NFL type style where almost every penalty decision and score goes to video review.

Artful_Badger

Steve Perchance wrote: »

I dont agree. There is something wrong with refs avoiding judgement calls. Especially if it keeps going the way it has been and it becomes most calls.

These reviews take time from the game, allowing momentum shifts to be stifled and hurting the spectacle for fans, particularly those at the game. A line needs to be drawn somewhere - otherwise we'll end up with an NFL type style where almost every penalty decision and score goes to video review.

If the ref/TJ isnt completely sure it should be checked. If its clear it wont be. I watched all the Irish games and highlights of some of the other games and tbh bar a couple of incidents it was fine. The only way it becomes most calls is if most tries are not clear cut, and then it should be checked anyway.

I dont think it is hurting the spectacle though I see it doing the opposite. Drastically reducing the chance of tries being wrongly awarded or disallowed makes for a better all round spectacle for the fans.

Riskymove

Jernal wrote: »

You're sliding all the way to the assumption that refs won't make any judgement calls now.

No actually I am responding to a suggestion of that

If a TJ cannot make a call on a pass not more than a couple of feet in front of him and an unobstructed view then how far is that from TJs not making ANY calls

If the attitude really does become that refs/TJs are criticised for making a call without going to the TMO, then I do think that the only logical progression is that they will do so more and more despite being being pretty sure of what has occurred.

awec

Jernal wrote: »

No actually the logic states that in particular instances there's nothing wrong with a ref asking for a second opinion. You're sliding all the way to the assumption that refs won't make any judgement calls now.

Second opinion is fine, but I think it has gone OTT now.

More often than not the referee goes to the TMO for a try now. Touch judges this season seem to exist just to inform the referee he should go to the TMO.

I think there is a happy medium, but I think that medium needs to be legislated for in the laws to remove some of the scenarios where going to the TMO is an option.

Otherwise it is just going to get worse as referees and TJs get more comfortable with having the video ref make the decisions. Games will be come even more stop start with long breaks here and there.

Artful_Badger

Riskymove wrote: »

No actually I am responding to a suggestion of that

If a TJ cannot make a call on a pass not more than a couple of feet in front of him and an unobstructed view then how far is that from TJs not making ANY calls

If the attitude really does become that refs/TJs are criticised for making a call without going to the TMO, then I do think that the only logical progression is that they will do so more and more despite being being pretty sure of what has occurred.

The refs and TJ's will be criticised no matter what I think, they always were. At least this way they are being criticised for making sure they are right rather than being criticised for being wrong, they get the flak as per usual yet probably avoid a lot of the abuse hurled at them. IF they are not sure enough to make the call then they cant be that sure in the first place either.

And its not that big a deal, the Irish teams ran in a lot of tries this weekend (more than you'd see in a typical game) along with a few disallowed for various reasons and the checking including the odd farce didnt prolong the games to any great degree.

Turtwig

Riskymove wrote: »

No actually I am responding to a suggestion of that

If a TJ cannot make a call on a pass not more than a couple of feet in front of him and an unobstructed view then how far is that from TJs not making ANY calls

If the attitude really does become that refs/TJs are criticised for making a call without going to the TMO, then I do think that the only logical progression is that they will do so more and more despite being being pretty sure of what has occurred.

Because a TJ is human. Stuff can easily happens whereby he either misses that vital second that contained the vital information to make the correct decision. This could be something as innocuous as holding an urge to sneeze. Humans are prone to lapses in concentration, expecting officials to be aware for every call is just unrealistic. If they're not confident there should be avenues for a second opinion. Obviously, they need to realise it's not a crutch to lean on for every decisions to be made in game, but at the same time that shouldn't be reason enough to not try to make their jobs easier and the overall results of the sport more just.

Turtwig

awec wrote: »

Second opinion is fine, but I think it has gone OTT now.

More often than not the referee goes to the TMO for a try now. Touch judges this season seem to exist just to inform the referee he should go to the TMO.

I think there is a happy medium, but I think that medium needs to be legislated for in the laws to remove some of the scenarios where going to the TMO is an option.

Otherwise it is just going to get worse as referees and TJs get more comfortable with having the video ref make the decisions. Games will be come even more stop start with long breaks here and there.

I don't disagree, but I think the progressive attitude for a change is a good thing. We can't expect them to find the correct balance straight away. Well we can hope it but it'll rarely happen. I always contrast this to soccer where the fear of any action making the game worse means the game is infected with maladies from tonnes of angles and nothing is done to combat it. At least rugby is a lot more proactive in that regard.

Steve Perchance

Jernal wrote: »

I don't disagree, but I think the progressive attitude for a change is a good thing. We can't expect them to find the correct balance straight away. Well we can hope it but it'll rarely happen. I always contrast this to soccer where the fear of any action making the game worse means the game is infected with maladies from tonnes of angles and nothing is done to combat it. At least rugby is a lot more proactive in that regard.

Absolutely its about finding balance. But we do need to weigh the benefits versus hurting the game. I'd rather the odd marginally forward pass is missed than have every game blighted with the ref going to the TMO for several minutes on a number of occasions. Or even the trend Nigel Owens and Wayne Barnes have started where they 'ask' the TMO but really just want another look on the big screen and dont even let the TMO speak.

Maybe a solution is that only the TMO gets to see the video. That might reduce the number of referrals straight away