Being an on-field referee is becoming a near impossible task.
Referees, in the traditional sense, are being made redundant on the field, as more and more decisions are being taken upstairs.
NFL, cricket, AFL, rugby league, tennis. The TMO has infiltrated most of our most popular sports over the last few years as technology has advanced, with varying effectiveness and fan reception.
And there has not been a clearer indication of a negative response than in the Rugby World Cup over the last couple of weeks.
A raft of games have been affected by use of the TMO, including England versus Fiji. Referee Jaco Peyper referred six decisions to the TMO – most of which were conceivably avoidable – detrimentally impacting both the occasion and flow of the match.
In the World Cup opener, the issue clearly stemmed from Peyper missing Fijian scrum-half Nikola Matawalu dropping the ball over the line – initially awarding a try only to reverse the decision moments later when the Twickenham crowed roared in disbelief when shown the dropped ball on the big screen.
From that point on, the South African’s confidence was destroyed, and numerous delays ensued while he repeatedly checked with his TMO over decisions that – as one of the top referees in game – he should have been able to make a call.
The delays have been so commented upon that World Rugby moved to released a statement sensationally going as far as to highlight that just 28 per cent of the stoppages in the opening game between Fiji and England were due to the TMO. Despite this being the case, impressions are everything, and the perception was that this was 28 per cent to much.
When Australian rugby legend Michael Lynagh waded into the debate with “It’s taking too long, it’s the process that’s wrong”, he hit the nail on the head.
The delays had Twickenham grumbling with a palpable sense of frustration even more so than England’s disjointed display.
Additionally, constant delays while staring at the stadium big screen is not an uncommon scenario for fans of rugby league.
Since being introduced in 1996, the TMO has evolved into the default option for referees for the most basic decisions, delivered to the fans with a hint of sponsorship chicken.
In Fridays NRL preliminary finals the TMO was also called upon on six occasions at Lang Park in the Broncos versus Roosters game, while the Storm versus Cowboys match warranted seven interventions.
When the TMO was called upon to disallow a Brisbane try as Corey Oats’ foot slid into touch, the ponderously deliberated replay showed the touch judge in the perfect position to make a call.
So why didn’t he?
The question was justifiably raised. If the touch judge is not going to do his job, then why is he there? Surely not just to wave his flag when the ball goes dead?
The near-constant use of the TMO in the NRL serves to give the impression that the referees are paralysed by fear. The fear of making the wrong call. The fear of spoiling the spectacle by sending a player off for foul play. It’s a fear that permeates and influences every decision the man (or men) in the middle makes.
So what does the future hold? If touch judges are unwilling to make a call, perhaps there is no need for them?
American sports have been long used to the TMO. The NFL is the undisputed king, with the entire game sculpted around television demands and capabilities.
With seven officials on the field in addition to a ‘replay official’ in the bunker in New York, the fallibility of referees is highlighted while paradoxically more are visibly utilised. It is a perfect showing of how technology can be allied to existing procedures.
In NFL, the TMO is called upon either by coaches challenges (two per game) and the ability of the TMO to ‘buzz’ the on-field official if a questionable play is called.
Because the video referee is watching the game – from a multitude of angles – the whole time, there is limited delay in the decision being made. This is something the NRL and Rugby World Cup would do well to investigate.
However the inevitable delays blend in as part of the punctuated nature of American Football, and although this has crept into rugby league, I’d wager its inclusion in union will be pointedly resisted.
As the TMO evolves, I think a coach challenge could be a good option. For a start, the referee is still utilised fully, the human element for most decisions is maintained, and absolute howlers can be eliminated.
As the money in sport ever increases – and technology improves – all sports are having to face the challenge of adapting to the increased scrutiny and ability of the men in the middle. Yet despite the temptation to march down a path of eliminating errors completely, to maintain the integrity of sport, the on-field official has to be allowed to do his job – and in doing so, the odd mistake will be made.
The alternative is almost beyond imagination.
Are we looking at a future where rugby matches of either code are reduced to 60 minutes playing time in order to fit all the delays in challenging and checking every single decision into a manageable block for TV.
And yet the current situation cannot be allowed to continue either. The constant erosion of the on-field referees authority has reached epidemic proportions and at least a part of that is due to their own unwillingness to make a call.
Sport is a game, and regardless of the importance of that ‘key’ decision, mistakes will be made. Rather than eliminate the referee completely, we should embrace and commend their impressive skills to the full. Allow the officials to regain the respect they’ve lost and be accepting of the occasional mistake.
Either that or start blocking out significantly more of your Saturday for the footy.
wardad
Guest
Nearly happened to the ABs vs England last year in the EOYT .
wardad
Guest
I agree in that it seems to even out anyway so what have we gained ?As for dirty play it was the number and quality of TV cameras that helped there even before in game replays .
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Good point about the touchies kaiviti. Especially as most (all?) of them are fairly high standard referees at this World Cup. You'd have thought they'd be able to bring their experience to play. Lots to keep an eye on though, so much can be missed. And you're right about Peyper and Fiji. Everyone, including England looked nervous. And that's justifiable. It was the World Cup Opener after all. Nowhere to hide... In that sence it's understandable as to why Peyper lost his bottle a bit. A lot of the players were guilty too, but as a collective they can sometimes hide those nerves. The ref is kinda isolated...
At work
Roar Rookie
1 minute from the penalty being called to take the kick should be sufficient. As you say, doesn't take long to run a a tee onto the ground. The Welsh lad Bigger would struggle with a time limit, jeez that guy has problems... Get on with it!
At work
Roar Rookie
Not a problem Simon, it's funny how pedantic people (me) can be sometimes :)
kaiviti
Guest
By the way what were the touch judge doing, the Referee watches the actual progress of the ball and the touchies watch out for anything else, simple as that. Whatever Richie did should have been spotted by either one of the touchies and the offence reported to the Ref who can then consult the TMO. The Ref can't have his eyes everywhere, so when an offense is spotted it is penalised by reference to the TMO, the decision should NEVER be dictated to by the crowd or some TMO scrolling back. As a result of the constant indecision of Jaco Pyper, Fiji lost their confidence and began to cringe whenever the TMO interjected or was consulted. What should have been a a champaign game of enjoyable running rugby deteriorated into an ego fest dominated by the TMO.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Ye that sounds reasonable. And how long does it take to get a tee onto the field anyhow... 40 in total. Keeps the backroom staff on their toes.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
I can see that PeterK, that why the best referees work in tandem with their touch judges. One looks for grounding, one looks for the touchline. Very hard, but that's what they are paid (sometimes) to do... What would the reception be to having another official in the in-goal? His job could be to look solely for grounding. Might end up looking like a game of NFL but more decisions could be made on the spot?
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Well said Ralph, it's a blight that affects every sport that I know. Officials are so regularly berated that it has almost become a part of the culture of going to sport.
Ralph
Roar Guru
Great referees are worth their weight in gold. A well refereed match is significantly better than an averagely refereed match with a TMO(s) "helping". Great referees are not born, they are made. A poor referee can totally destroy a whole game for players and fans. Given these statements, which I contend to be true, it boggles my mind that referees are not paid more, not trained more, not organised as an independent body and are cast as villains of our game, subject to unfettered, rarely relenting abuse that often appears to have no limits or constraint in manners or respect. If our game devolves into increasing delays from more and more technology designed to 'fix' poor officiating (and quite without any material increase in the quality of the result) I suggest it will be fair to lay an equal amount of the blame at the feet of the fans as the regulators.
PeterK
Roar Guru
contentious decisions and interpretation are one thing. Clearly wrong another. There were far more clearly wrong decisions before the TMO. Lots where the ball was dropped like in the fiji england game awarded. Where the foot went out before grounding or conversely the foot did not go out before grounding but was ruled no try. Like in cricket and stumpings or runouts it is too hard at real time to look at 2 things at once and work out what happened first. Perfect thing for the tmo to work out.
PeterK
Roar Guru
the 1 minute for a kick is after the tee arrives. IMO 30 secs is plenty if you change it to after the kicker has placed the ball on the tee and stands up. The kicker has 30 secs to step back line it up and walk in and kick it.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Ye I wasn't really sure of the protocol there - I was all ready to blow up about how unfair it was that the try had been given when he chalked it off and went upstairs. Still felt a little uneasy though. Don't get me wrong, I was glad the right decision was upheld, and it gave us a perfect opportunity to view the brilliant tackle and tapping of the elbow by the England defender (Brown???) in slow motion, but once the try had been given - I would have thought you had to keep that decision.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
"Life and sport are a series of contentious decisions." That is an absolutely perfect way to describe why referees and their interpretations are so important. Couldn't agree more. That's part of the appeal of sport isn't it? I remember a friend once moaning to me after a game how terrible the referee was today and how its always like this, and I asked him what we'd talk about on the way home of the ref did everything right. He was stumped... Of course the great skill of the players etc, but the referee is such an important focal point, as the figure of authority (boss if you like) is in life. If we do go to the extreme NFL approach we loose a significant part of what makes rugby, rugby. Interpretation of the rules makes up such an important part of how the game is played. Remove that and it becomes a formulaic series of plays not unlike what the NFL evolved into. This was a great comment, thanks.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
I certainly agree with you on the point that sometimes one replay would do. The Nikola Matawalu try vs England was a case in point. You could tell after the first replay it was no try. Unlucky, but move on. Unfortunately we had to look for another 3 angles (all worse) to show what we had already seen. It was maddening. Speeding up the other areas would be awesome too. There is a rule in water polo whereby if a foul is given and the player it is given to swims away from the ball, the foul is instantly reversed. Would be impossible in rugby, but in football it should work like that. I hate seeing players win a free kick or throw in, pick up the ball and then drop it so someone else can take it. 30 seconds is pretty short for a kick - 45 would be fine. I wonder how often the one minute rule is rigidly applied... I'll keep an eye open for it. 40 seconds is long enough in American Football to get a kicking team out onto the field and for an attempt to be made - should be much faster in rugby.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
This is particularly a problem in lower level English football Sean. The referee's appear to tell the linesmen that they are not there to help him other than to call offsides and point the way he tells them. It gets very frustrating seeing linesmen pointedly watch the action, see the ball go out and then watch the referee to point at which direction he thinks the throw in should go - sometimes even changing his decision to match the referee despite knowing he is right and what he saw is right. I fear the touch judges will go the same way in both rugby codes. But that dies raise the question as to their purpose in the first place. They would be the first to go I'd have thought...
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Thanks wardad, I appreciate that. And agree, the TMO has just slowed everything down. I'd rather refs felt they could make a tough call when required rather than give everyone a break while it is checked from 1000 angles...
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Cheers Kia, I do agree with the big screen somehow taking something away from the experience of watching the game live. In England it's less of a problem as much fewer of the games are played at grounds with big screens anyway, particularly football so you definitely had to pay attention all the time! Would be useful on occasion though, I remember going to see a cricket game with my Grandmother once and she somehow managed to miss all but one of the 19 wickets that fell on the day... I definitely get your point over the replays to assist the home team. I seem to remember that Tottenham got into hot water once by showing a contentious decision repeatedly in an EPL match at White Hart Lane (one of the few English football grounds with video screens built in)... And valid point about Richie ;-)
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Sorry At work, I just wanted to keep the phrase the same for everything incase of confusion - which I now see it has caused anyway... Not referring to the TMO as Television Match Official was an oversight on my part Ben so apologies for that too.
Dave_S
Guest
Sean, in fairness I think the touchies are still contributing their views, the difference now is the refs are going to the TMOs a lot anyway. I don't recall the game (I saw a lot on the w/e) but there was a good example of the touchie doing exactly what you asked for - he reported an incident to the ref and gave a recommendation that it should be a penalty but no card (and in my view he was right), and the ref followed his advice and got on with it.