Scope of TMO could be expanded post RWC

Would someone actually explain what the roles are of the ARs., apart from marking the line out . Based on my ignorance I would suggest this is the area I would work on, onfield management to me should( could) be more beneficial than going to the TMO for more decisions. Again sorry about my ignorance before posting but this condition doesn't stop heaps of others either !

The cricket DRS has led to a situation where an even bigger problem is created than what they were intending to fix. A wrong call by the umpire forces one team to use their review, then the unfair weighting of the umpires call (one he is forced to make one way or the other even if uncertain about the decision) can mean the bad decision still stands. On top of that the team is doubly penalised because they have lost a review, and then the team that the decision incorrectly favoured has saved their review as well. The opposite decision by the umpire would have meant that all three penalties/advantages would have gone the other way. A big swing in circumstances for one wrong decision whereas without the DRS it's really only the one penalty for a bad decision. I would suggest they go with no weighting from the umps original decision or let the ump say it's too close to call and he sends it upstairs. They can do it for runouts and low catches, why not other decisions when they are forced to make a call but clearly can't be certain.

That's fine by me as well. Having said that, replays have always been a fact of life with all sport. Sometimes officials make mistakes. We should not try to create an artificial perfect world. Next step down this path is time outs.

Barnes and forward passes go hand in hand. :) misses when he refs and misses when he runs touch ... duh

on the subject of tmo, recently the pakistan cricket coach has urged icc to change the 3rd umpire protocols and decision referral system. he was not happy with the hawk eye prediction of LBWs where anything less than 50% of ball hitting the stump is not out and vice versa. Waqar had wanted this changed to 70 : or at least 60 : 40.

I'm happy with that summary Lindsay. I haven't had the opportunity to review match but felt while there might have been the odd mistake, Owens seemed very even/fair in his decisions. I also agree that just because you bump or touch a teammate in front of you there shouldn't be any stoppage if no advantage or deliberate intention was involved. I was disappointed to lose but glad it wasn't due to poor reffing.

Most of the angst I've heard is centred about the five minutes before half time. I've watched that bit over and over and there are no refereeing errors in this period. There is a lot of shouting by commentators about things they think he's missed but when you slow them down and go back and forth, Owens is correct in every case. The forward pass was 6 minutes 20 seconds prior to half time so not in that time frame, but it was certainly forward and potentially a bad miss. Owens asks Wayne Barnes if it was ok and he says it was fine. Because Milner-Skudder is stopped in his tracks after passing it looks a lot worse, and in effect was only marginally forward when you take his momentum out of the equation. But forward passes are missed every game. It didn't affect the result in any way. There was no undetected knockon in this period. In the incident everyone is referring to, Retallick throws a bad low pass to Coles and it hits his foot. It never goes near his hand. This was a beat up by the commentators. In the possible accidental offside, Nonu runs into Carter. He bounces off sideways and is tackled instantly by Hooper. There is no impeding of a defender, if anything the tackle is made easier for Hooper because Nonu has been stopped already and is off balance going sideways and back. The bump into Carter has no effect on the play whatsoever. Hooper is given more of a chance to make a big hit and be dominant over Nonu, and he gets his hands on the ball before being cleaned out, which he may not have been able to do if he had to tackle Nonu at speed. Owens is quite correct to play on as there was no effect on play and the defenders were not disadvantaged. There were no refereeing errors in this 5 minute period yet this is what most people point to in saying that Owens had a bad game. The ref overall had no undue influence on the result of the game. He let the game flow and contributed to a great spectacle.

I've got a better idea, smash the TMO monitors and get on with the game.

Get rid of Wayne Barnes and the issue is sorted. Look at the replay you see Owen put the whistle to his lips suspecting a forward pass & waits for a call from Barnes which he never gets. If the ABs scored a try from that play I have no doubt the TMO would have played a role and disallow a try. Maybe rugby should be played in slow motion to make it easier to ref???

Yes Who. Some players/teams have been allowed to boot the ball into the stands after the whistle for free kick or penalty, while others have been binned for dropping the ball behind them and not handing it directly to the player who charges into them pushing them over as well as trying to get the ball.

In which case it should also be removed for the spectators and commentators. Giving them access and denying it to the refs will only lead to a complete undermining of the refs credibility.

I think World Rugby's getting a bit of unjustified criticism over the TMO here. Which is really, really weird to type... The way the TMO was used in the first week was rubbish. But, through the weeks, they became a part of the 'team of four'. You'd hear refs calling, "Sean! Graeme! George! Have a look?" Instant reviews while play continued, if there was nothing, then it was let go. A great example was the high tackle on Pocock in the second half of the final. Nigel called, "Sean! Have a look?" Eventually, you could hear him say, "Advantage over anyway!" It was great work - Owens wasn't stressing about whether or not he'd missed a piece of foul play, because the TMO could check it, and if play had broken down, the correct call would've been made. Rather than a guess. I would like to see spider cam - or a drone - used for scrums (for boring) in live time. The TMO's clearly miked up, it would be a consistent, live conversation. That works! I do have an issue with quick taps not being taken from the mark. Not just because it cost the Wallabies 7 points against the ABs last year at Ballymore! But it's consistent. And the YC in the 3rd/4th playoff was an absolute farce - no way Cubelli actually impeded Pienaar... That said, penalties for not handing the ball over quickly enough? They only seem to go against certain teams - Argentina seem to have impunity to kick the ball away all they want! But that's not a TMO issue...

Don't stress Dave, we won't be harping on about the forward pass in 8 years time. :-P And let's be fair - Barnes was the touchie this time, he wasn't in Cardiff all those years ago... Congrats on the win - your team are very worthy winners.

Which commentators were you listening to? Fox guys, fair enough. But Quinlan and Gomersall weren't sold on his performance, either, calling several things for Australia that Owens saw the other way. So I don't see that it's possible claim Owens had a good game. That said, I completely, completely agree the ABs were worthy winners. We were too slow to our own breakdown, we were too deep in attack, we failed to win the gainline or contact, and we couldn't score points against 15 men. Of our 17 points, 14 came during the YC. ABs absolutely worthy winners, untarnished by the ref's performance. But that doesn't mean that Nigel had a good game.

A number of issues arose from this WC. Inconsistency in use of TMO, citing process, suspension of players and total reluctance to cite player for cynical play that may have caused a foul play incident. Also getting scrum penalties right. I think everyone apart from refs are now aware that scrum domination is often due to illegalities from the dominant scrum. Another concern is the quick tap from a penalty or free kick. Often the original penalty/free kick is highly debatable and very marginal. But the tap is often taken away from the infringement and not directly behind, with support players in front of the penalty spot advancing forward while other attacking team players holding back defenders in a ruck or scrum. The player taking the tap then charges directly at a retreating defender who makes the tackle. From what was so often the most marginal if even correct decision can result in a sin binning and penalty try. Teams are being coached to take advantage of this situation, to milk the penalties. I'm all for open fast rugby, but at what cost when a match is ruined or determined by a nothing penalty. There's also a fine line between getting binned for not handing the ball over quick enough in the event of the opposition gaining a free kick and pretending to not hear the whistle and kicking the ball into the crowd or taking a quick tap and running away pretending you thought it was your penalty. Too much cynicism and inconsistency around these free kicks to justify the benefit of open play. Some taps are taken as the ref puts his whistle to his mouth and before he has indicated which team is being penalised. I think at the very least the ball should be placed on the ground after the ref has indicated the penalty spot. As it stands, a penalty can have very different circumstances and outcomes depending on who has hold of the ball when whistle is blown.

Um, no, the role of the TMO should be removed from rugby post World Cup, would be my response. You will never get perfect decisions, even with the TMO. But you will get inconsistency and time wasting. Please, please do not give these officials more power. Interesting anology is tennis where Hawke eye is used. What people don't realise is that Hawkeye has an error factor of around 5-10mm, so the really close calls are a complete lottery.

whatever they decide they should definitely wait until the first match of the world cup to make the change. worked this time after all.

Totally agree about the scrum resets, but your estimate is way off in how much time is lost. Last year the average time lost was closer to 20 minutes per game. I disagree about Owens having a bad game. He did not impose himself on the game unduly and allowed it to flow. One of the reasons he was appointed is because he contributes to a flowing game. He did this nicely and the game was a great spectacle partly because of his influence. He actually made very few errors. The Australian commentators made far more errors than he did. After close inspection, most of the things the commentators got upset about, Owens was right and they were wrong, particularly in the 5 minutes before halftime.

I will continue to be in favour of a light touch when it comes to TMO's, more refs and new technologies. If we use a heavy hand in an effort to get perfect results we'll be playing American football. Which already exists if that's your thing.

Agree with the scrum resets. Definitely should stop the clock and not start it up again until the scrum is fed