Sunday morning, my wife and I went on a bicycle ride around where we live. She had been travelling and busy at work so we limited the ride to around 30 miles.
She also “demanded” that we limit the speed to around a 100-120 beats per minute (heart rate) so we could talk.
She has become a rugby fanatic since we met in 2007. I took her to the fateful France versus All Blacks quarter-final in Cardiff and we went to Paris the next night to see Argentina play Scotland.
Since then, attending the Rugby World Cup has been important to her and we will be attending semis again this year. She is already bugging me about the next Lions tour.
She wanted to ask about Reece Hodge’s tackle and the offsides at rucks that, according to her eyes, weren’t been called. Basically, she wanted to know how I refereed those types of issues.
I told her that there is a big difference when you have TV cameras and TMOs compared to when you are on the field, with a possibly trained assistant referee on the side.
In addition, World Rugby has recently sent out a directive dealing with high tackles and shoulder charges that requires a mastering in decision theory. It becomes quite difficult to go through the entire process in your head when you have two sides aiming for opposite outcomes.
A complete understanding of the factors is hard and all the aspects to consider are overwhelming. But, in a large number of cases, it is clear.
Not in the Rugby World Cup.
She mumbled something about a wishy-washy answer and left it there.
Reece Hodge and Kurtley Beale celebrate a try. (William West/AFP/Getty Images)
We then went to the offside laws, with which she was familiar, but then said that logistically, the referee has to make too many observations at the time of the ruck. She asked me what I did during a game.
You first look at the tackle and then the release. You look at player entry, possible sealing, attempt to pilfer, hands in the ruck – and then, somehow, you look at the offside line.
If a ruck lasts just a few seconds, you must go through many laws basically at the same time. Referees tend to stay looking at the ruck, and barely look at the offside line until the ball is leaving. Occasionally, you get the perfunctory message to the defence, but it is almost not policed.
This is because referees keep looking at the ball, even if it is clearly available to release.
During my referee training, the coach told us not to look at the ball when it is kicked – gravity will always bring it down – look at what is happening on the ground. But if we don’t look at the ruck, players will hold defenders and commit other peccadilloes.
In tennis, the ball is tracked and when players doubt a call, they can refer to the tracking mechanism. In Formula One, telemetry is available for all cars and speed is centrally controlled in the boxes area. In American football, the ten-yard line is marked on your TV sets and you can see where the first down marker lies.
In Test rugby, almost all coaches have telemetry transmitters providing player data relating to GPS positioning (speed, distance and the like) and possibly heart rate monitoring to address workload.
It should be possible to develop an algorithm that automatically determines the offside line in rucks and, maybe with some guidelines for the TMO, inform the referee of infractions and help facilitate the policing of rucks, scrums and line-outs
If the technology proves effective, referees can spend more time focusing on aspects that are not easy to monitor technologically.
We have some of the tools already. Why not get World Rugby to develop this? Wouldn’t we all prefer to have these laws applied correctly?
Gepetto
Roar Rookie
Because Los Pumas would have defeated Les Bleus who seemed to be offside for the final five minutes of their clash.
Rusty
Roar Guru
Its an interesting topic and as alluded to perhaps out of reach of current tech for all use cases. So perhaps the trick is not to try fix everything all at once but bring in an incremental change to begin the process. Something like chipping and tracking the ball so that a line can be digitally overlaid on an overhead view of the field. This would provide a simple visual cue for an AR tracking offsides in relation to the ball while providing context to the play. The/an AR can then feed the ref the info so repeat offences can be warned and policed. What isnt though is tracking the ball
Chris Love
Roar Guru
Carlos, I love the drive to get the right decision. But many many fans of all sports don’t. Take for example last year’d, NRL “crack down”. Penalties galore. Just as teams were beginning to toe the line, the chorus of idiot commentators and fans alike grew to strong and Greenberg relented. Back to square one. Take cricket as a prime example. Umpires can’t watch the front foot no ball, the pitch of the ball’s in relation to the stumps, where it strikes the pad and the angle at which it was travelling to project it onto the stumps, at 155km/hr. It’s just impossible to do with any real consistency. We have the exact technology to get it right 98% of the time but refuse to use it unless a captain protests a decision. Then if he gets it wrong twice that’s the end of the use of the tech for what could be more than an entire day.
TragicallySupportive
Roar Rookie
Great idea. Hopefully people much more intelligent than me can find a way to implement it. It’s my understanding that GPS technology is accurate to around 1 metre which is good from space but is an issue when your talking millimeters between being on or offside. The other issue is that the offside line at a ruck (behind the last feet) effectively changes each time a new player enters the ruck. If a player loses their feet they are no longer part of the ruck and the line changes again. (Correct me if I’m wrong, referees) I’d love to see it happen though, or even have the touch judges responsible for it in all facets.
Nick
Roar Guru
Margin of error is still +/- about 20 cm though yeah? That's enough in rugby to be the difference between off and on.
Mango Jack
Roar Guru
You’re a lucky man, Carlos. Does your wife have a sister? Just asking :happy:
Nick
Roar Guru
Because GPS - unless you are using military frequencies - is not accurate enough. Commercial stuff can get to about 1m accuracy. Accuracy to 1m is still not going to be good enough.
elvis
Roar Rookie
I reckon it would take me about 3000 words and a lot of handwaving to explain it, it is more of a point to be explained over a beer :-)
Ally
Guest
Didn’t all the offsides infractions get worse when they were looking to speed up the game and reduced the time to produce the ball? Lots of offsides calls will slow the game down. Would allowing a ruck more time also give the ref time to absorb everything? In American football there’s so many discussions among the officials makes it slow and boring.
Melburnian
Roar Pro
Interesting point, didn't think of that.
oomtas
Guest
The offside line should be moved back further to 5m behind the last feet .This should help open up the game . Give the TMO the line technology which they use on TV in swimming as a swimmer chases a world record .This will make things clearer .
Geotan
Guest
Why not just use the technology that is available. Have the spidercam track the ruck and the tmo can keep an eye on it from there with technology to put a line on the screen to see who is offside. Why is the linesmen not used to assist in this? I also think they could use the spidercan with the tmo at scrums to help the ref. Maybe a second onfield ref maybe the answer lime in some other sports.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
I don’t understand your point. Sorry!
elvis
Roar Rookie
No, this is what happens when single issue pollies get elected or OCD public servants get out of control. Huge costly solutions to problems that are mostly non issues. The crowds in Japan don't care about marginal offsides, and even half the people on here will disagree about any actual offside put up for debate.
piru
Roar Rookie
Oh I've run chains more times than I care to remember - I wasn't referring to the chains themselves, which, while perhaps a bit dated, at least are under the control of the referees on the field. I mean the yellow line superimposed onto the field by the broadcast.
elvis
Roar Rookie
And then the main attribute to play top rugby would be a resistance to being tazered :-)
elvis
Roar Rookie
Any gap at the back of the ruck will make the following happen. Endless pick and drives. Why wouldn't you? There was a reason unlimited tackle rugby league was changed. I'd do away with backs and have 12 forwards and 3 halfbacks. Three pods marching endlessly up the field.
elvis
Roar Rookie
Why do we want it resolved? Would you have enjoyed or played the game as much if it were an exercise in public service pedantry? We are putting a modern interpretation on laws that were very much likely to have not had the same intent when they were first introduced.
AndyS
Guest
The law says nothing about how far the ball has to travel upfield. 10.4c requires the player to immediately retire behind an onside player, 10.7 says that if he doesn't he can't be run onside by a teammate...specifically notes the exclusion of 10.4c. Smith didn't retire, didn't even stay where he was, he only ran across and forward towards the point where he eventually received the pass.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
Dunno.....