In a update to rugby’s rules, the television match official (TMO) will be able to advise the referee about incidents of potential foul play and will also be able to review up to two phases of play before a try is awarded, if consulted by a referee.
This applies to both hemispheres at the start of each season. Since it was the IRB, I am not sure if this will apply in the upcoming Super Rugby season.
On the surface this is a great idea. Many tries are scored from illegal blocking and holding back players. Also, referees seem to miss a lot of forward passes.
Also foul play can be checked and reported, no more of the ref saying I did not get the number.
This too is great; there are areas to hide.
However, there are three downsides.
The first is obvious, the game slows down while things are checked. Considering the benefits, this is a worthwhile sacrifice.
The second is subtle. It changes the balance between attack and defence even more towards the defensive team. Less tries will be scored because more illegalities will be found.
However there is no equivalent addressing of illegalities/cynical cheating committed by the defence in stopping tries. Too many are missed by the refs.
To address this I believe an attacking captain should be able to go to the video checking for offences that had material effect in the 22.
Any call for review would need to be for a specific offence.
For any challenge to proceed, it must go through the referee who would only refer it if he was unable to be sure of the decision.
I would allow four challenges. If you are successful, then you keep the challenge.
The third downside is one of consistency.
A major issue is that refs do not enforce all the laws so a video ref will be inconsistent with the on-field ref.
However a referee struggles to consistent for the whole game anyway, so this will be nothing new.
Overall, I am for the change but would like the balance between attack and defence addressed in the future.
Dadiggle
Guest
How many weeks would this be John? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2dozu9rQ7c
Dadiggle
Guest
You have your NZ glasses on I have my opposing view glasses on. Different views which is influenced by our emotions. So let it be. Altough I did not state France would have won. They still would have lost Parra or not
Jerry
Guest
I think they do it the same reason you post such drivel. Starts with 'S' and ends in 'tupidity'.
Dadiggle
Guest
Fokken hot around 37 Johnno haha. But tell me honestly why do you think guys like Heaslip, Botha and Cooper throws a cheap shot at the NZ players? Do you think they are monsters who just like to punch everyone they see? No cause of cheating and blind officials not doing their job. All could have been avoided had the referee done his job. In Botha situation I dunno how could he have missed it.
richard
Guest
I have seen your posts,and as Jerry says, you can't be taken seriously.People see what they want to see. It's ironic,considering another passage of play in the same game.I refer to the game ending injury to Aaron Cruden.Take a look at the tackle that saw him leaving the field with a knee injury.The french player making the tackle loops his leg through Cruden's leg,and then twists his upper torso sideways.The effect is to incur a knee injury,which removes him from the field.This cynical piece of play went un-noticed,but I have no doubt was done on purpose,as it removed nz's last recognised first-five from the game. Don't talk to us about cynical play,nz are on the receiving end virtually every time they take the field.
Hot.
richard
Guest
Jerry, his earlier posts should have tipped you off.
Jerry
Guest
Thanks for that, now I know not to take anything you say seriously.
Jerry
Guest
So, how is South Africa this time of year Mr Van Zyl?
Dadiggle
Guest
No. Bakkies was a ruck clearer.He cleared those Kiwi's who accidentally like to take that extra second to get away from the ball. By your reaction he was so effective that NZ impaired their line out with Brad Thorn to look after him.
Jerry
Guest
Do you see the irony in complaining about Bakkies F'ing Botha being niggled off the ball?
Dadiggle
Guest
If the referee saw it and blown the whistle for it Botha would not have head butted him. In the end Cowna got away and Botha was sited. But Botha Rock Bottom him later in another match. Think they had to scoop Cowan up after that one. Was a massive tackle.
Dadiggle
Guest
Accident my arse. He was the French play maker and they took him out. You do not per accident into a guys head with your knee. He saw him there before he joined and he ran straight through. He made it look like a accident like hie make his loitering look like a accident but it was no accident.
soapit
Guest
mania there are already countless practical differences between the conditions for amateur and test rugby. you should let that one go. should all test touch judges be a mate of the team from each side?
Jerry
Guest
A slight difference between a guy charging full tilt at a breakdown (and not looking down) and a guy lying on the ground slowly getting up (and looking down until a moment before the contact). I've said it before, but if McCaw was able to perfectly time it and predict when Parra would raise his head so that he deliberately hit Parra with both a hand and a knee, whilst not breaking stride, changing direction or even looking at him, AND then hit Dusautoir with enough force to clean him out then he's an even better player than I thought he was.
Spencer
Guest
That's exactly what happened when Richie head butted Quades knee.
Sandgroper
Guest
I think some of you guys have missed a valuable up side to this change. For those of us who watch rather than play the game and are of a certain age the extra break in play allows us the opportunity of a quick dash to the bathroom and we can be back in time to have missed nothing but some commentator filing empty air with their limited knowledge. A giant leap forward for those of the weak bladder brigade.
Shop
Guest
To go back more than one phase after is opening a can of worms but I can't see why anyone would be against the TMO calling foul play. Think of the Hore and Higgingbotham incidents this year. Both players would have received yellow cards (Hore perhaps a red). This new power will undoubtedly make players think twice about trying to get away with these tactics if they knew the team is bound to suffer.
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
I guess you just need to cast around in the shallows so you don't get out of your depth HT. I thought it was a reasoned argument addressing the issues behind the innovation. I already don't watch League because of its simplicity. Refs decisions, right or wrong, are final and trying to achieve some sort of perfection is a poisoned chalice. We don't need it, we don't want it, take it away. TMO's are already a waste of time - If you want to get 5 points make sure the ref has no doubt. We have seen these Laws in practise in League, Cricket, NFL... all pro sports have them and they all take time, cost momentum, for little gain. The gambling industry is insidious, gambling is also just plain stupid, it must be resisted by all decent society.
Skills and Techniques
Guest
I hope the tech rulings on foul play will be no longer than the treatment for the affected player. Involvement for the crowd is imperative to avoid a bore fest. There has to be some music leading up to a massive roar on the decision from one side of each packed stadium. Am I wishing for too much?