So much for technology
- 7 Feb 07, 05:21 PM
Only last week, I made my first post here on the Six Nations blog, and sang the praises of the tournament - in particular, the technology employed to make it a more interesting spectacle.
I'm not going to waste my time by debating a moot point, but how ironic was it that the very technology I singled out for praise was to become the most controversial aspect in the Calcutta Cup match at Twickenham?
Whether you think the Television Match Official called Jonny Wilkinson's try rightly, or wrongly, the technology which produced the action replay appeared to have been largely ignored.
Of course, the match was over as a contest by that stage, so it's all academic anyway.
Ultimately, what it proves is not the inefficiency of computers, cameras or microphones, but the fallibility of human beings, even when faced with fairly incontrivertible evidence.
Unfortunately, all the computers in the world won't change intransigence.
But I'm not bitter. Let's just hope the TMO is wearing his prescription specs on Saturday.
Wales 27-18 England
Comments Post your comment
As you say; it had no bearing on the game. Let it go!
Complain about this post
Its a big shame that something like this has to happen as the video referee is in my opinion a great asset to the game and has resulted in many desicions that may have been given wrong being given correctly with the advice of the TMO. I feel that because of the wilkinson factor this incidence is viewed as more important and people are making judgements that it is a poor idea and ignoring the numerous occasions when the TMO has done its job spectacularly.
1 mess up, we are all human. (Except maybe jonny)
Complain about this post
The fact that it didn't affect the outcome has no bearing on the fact that the TMO shouldn't hold that post again. Even Brian Moore (hardly the most neutral of commentators) could see his foot was out. It makes a mockery of the whole TV replay system.
(Just to clarify, i'm not Scottish either!)
Complain about this post
It was a mistake by the TMO.
That does not make a mockery of the TV replay system, it just makes that particular TMO look stupid.
Over the past few seasons the TMO's have removed a lot of potential controversy - particularly the type that we had when TV did it's own review and armchair refereeing.
The sooner the same technology gets applied to other sports (like soccer) the better.
Complain about this post
I think its worrying when you consider how important it could have been. Had the game been tighter, well, there would have been a lot of unanswered questions. What concerns me, is that there appears to be no matter of recourse for the TMO, he makes an appalling decision, does not have to apologise, and is free to carry out other duties. If players are subject to post-game citing, then why not post-game analysis of TMOs, refs etc., but done so publically. I'm not expecting the birch (well, maybe for Colin Hawke).
Complain about this post
Paul,
rest assured that all refs at this level, (and even us refs at lower levels but in important games), are always analysed by experts after every game. At these games all refs are accompanied by a top-level assessor who will run through all aspects of the game with the officials afterwards, and can sometimes be extremely scathing. If the ref really blunders, this can result in him being dropped a level. Why this should be done publicly i do not understand.
Complain about this post
Sour Scots - I have known a few non-tries given against England in the not so distant past bt TMO's and after initial complaints let the matter lie. What would you lot of said had a Scottish player scored instead? - I'm guessing you would of just said that this kind of thing happens in sport and that I should stop being such an arrogant Englishman and take the decision on the chin - take your own advice please!
Complain about this post
Martin, the title of your blog should be, "So much for humans..."
The technology worked perfectly - we could all see in clear, super slow motion, that Wilkinson's foot was in touch before he got the ball down. The TMO's decision was an abberation and only he knows how he got it so wrong.
On other blogs you can read some highly amusing theories ranging from mere incompetence to hilarious conspiracy theories and endless speculation about what would have happened if any number of different scenarios had been played out during the game.
Personally, it always seems to me that these things have a way of evening themselves out over the course of a game. So, the conspiracy theorists argue that the margin of victory flattered England because in a perfect world the Wilkinson "try" would not have been given. But, in that mythical perfect world Scotalnd's 2nd "try" would have also been disallowed because the referee would have spotted the Scottish jumper pulling down the English jumper with his inside arm at the lineout that led to the try.
So, if both try's had been disallowed the winning margin would have been the same - see, it all works out in the end.
Personally, as an England supporter, I was left disatisfied that it was given, just as Mr Wilkinson was after the game - see his post match Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú interview for his view. However, I was hugely encouraged by the great break by Ellis and the superb skill of Wilkinson in getting to the corner and getting the ball down one handed when the rest of him (except for the foot)was in mid air on the wrong side of the corner flag. 99% of my enjoyment came for the sheer skill of it - shame an error by the official tarnished it.
Complain about this post
Its not the first for the touch ref
When scotland played SA he awarded a double movement try to Shalke Burger even though you could clearly see him slipping it over the line.
After the match Berger said it wasnt a try but Donal Courtney awarded and still holds his post.
The IRB have to stop protecting these guys and I shudder to say but go the football way way where if they make one appaling decison they are gone.
Mind you we would lose the likes of
Simon Mcdowell
Steve Walsh
Donal Courtney
but is that a bad thing ?
Complain about this post
Although I agree that there is no doubt that
the TMO got it wrong on this occasion, it
seems that most commentators are very
'one-eyed' about it. It has been
conveniently forgotten that Scotland's first
try should not have been awarded (a similar
incident also occurred in the Ireland match
in last years Six Nations). England have been
on the rough end of a few of these decisions
in recent times. Perhaps a change in the
staff has also resulted in a change in
fortune?. The result is now part of history.
Move on.
Complain about this post
no bearing, england win championship by one try scenario.
Complain about this post
Why not have small monitors behind the goal line to for the referee (and the his assistants) to analyse the replays and make a decision? This keeps the referee as the sole arbiter of decisions during the game. Plus the referee will generally have a feeling as to what the outcome should be so will be using the replays more as confirmation than as his only decision making tool.
Complain about this post
I understood that the TMO is only permitted to rule on what occurs in the in-goal area (including corner flags). e.g.during the Premiership Final there were complaints from the experts that Cueto's try should NOT have been referred to the TMO re a possible earlier knock-on.
In which case the whereabouts of JW's right foot was nothing to do with the TMO. He could only rule on whether the ball was grounded before JW hit the corner flag.
It's a daft rule I agree, but the TMO shouldn't be criticised for not exceeding his brief.
Complain about this post
slight tangent here:
in general i am in favour of the use of technology in sport, but the situation in which the use of the tmo really frustrates me is when a large number of players have piled over the try line and there is no chance that the tmo will be able to see the ball.
back in the good old days, the ref would stop play, get down on his hands and knees and tell the players to get up slowly in order that he can see where the ball is. the fact that defence players would scramble to get their hand under the ball during this pause was part and parcel of the game (and the ref would invariably notice).
with reliance on the tmo, the refs nowadays pass the buck completely in this situation and make no attempt to see what the situation looks like on the ground. so many tries that would have been beyond reasonable doubt prior to the introduction of tmos are now not given (viz. noon v nz).
in this particular scenario (which is far from uncommon), the reliance on the tmo spoils the game. it needs to be addressed.
Complain about this post
Had scotland been awarded the "try" in the same way Wilkinson was, and the England fans had been moaning about it, the England fans would have labelled boring, arrogant, and whatever else they have been called over the years. Scotland fans, mistakes happen, it's called sport, no-one died, get over it.
Complain about this post
Had scotland been awarded the "try" in the same way Wilkinson was, and the England fans had been moaning about it, the England fans would have labelled boring, arrogant, and whatever else they have been called over the years. Scotland fans, mistakes happen, it's called sport, no-one died, get over it.
Complain about this post
Firstly, mistakes are made and I don’t think many would disagree that it clearly was not a try. Almost every guy in my rugby club commented on the same (predominantly England fans), but it stood rightly or wrongly.
I don’t thing the ‘if it were Scotland, Ireland France etc’ arguments are very valid, yes there are mistakes, and through the joy of television we can see things most cannot. I remember standing in to ref a colts game, now while on the pitch I am quick to criticize with ‘Sir are you blind’ type comments, I found out just how much you do miss when I watched the game on tape.
Now I don’t know the exact situation or circumstance the operator/4th official is in when reviewing the tapes so I won’t comment on that.
I believe it was a bad call, plain and simple. The footage was pretty clear so it was the 4th officials fault, the replay just shows what it sees with no comment. So I agree with the previous ‘it was human error’ comment as it was.
I wouldn’t start saying it needs changing, replacing etc as I don’t think it does, it was a bad call applying the technology incorrectly, no different to a Surgeon misinterpreting some test results and cutting open a wrong leg, or wrong artery.
It’s a mistake, but it doesn’t happen all the time, in fact most of the time it does not, nobody is posting comments about when it does work and is applied correctly the majority of the time, it is a good addition to the game.
Complain about this post
At the end of the day, referees will always be biased and the technology we have will never get used enough. Look at the wales match, should have had a penalty try and easterby should have been sin binned twice. The referee even told him the first time if he does it again he is off, and he did!
Complain about this post
I am not sure about the above post, but I do know that the TMO is only allowed to comment on the question that the ref asks. I cannot remember the question that the ref asked, but if it was can you check the grounding, the TMO can only say that the grounding was OK. In this case the grounding was fine. The fact that half of Johnny was in touch is nothing to do with the grounding. Was it the TMO or the ref?
Complain about this post
I seem to remember hearing the referee ask the TMO to check wether Jonny's knee had touched the ground (did anyone else hear it?), and suspect having done so he (as did I at the time) focused on just that, the knee. Yes, when you looked at the foot, it was clearly no try, but he was asked to look at the knee.
It all detracts from the game, and I feel sorry for those who want the TMO sacked. If spectators start officiating from the sidelines, the players might follow suit, and before we know it we might as well be watching football where everything gets contested and the referees deserve a medal for taking to the field! I wonder how many Rugby Refs also referee football. I'd be interested in their thoughts on the two different games and attitudes.
Complain about this post
The Idea of having a video referee is to make sure decisions like this never happen. Obviously in this instance the video referee, for some reason, failed to do his duty. In isolaton, it is correct to say that the decision had no bearing on the outcome of the game. However, at the end of what promises to be a close fought tournament, if England finish ahead of another team because of a points difference of less than 7 on the final table, that team will have a right to feel agrieved.
Complain about this post
The technology is fine, brilliant in fact. It showed us exactly what had happened in a way we couldn't have dreamed of years ago. The error was in the people using, unless Geoff (post 13) is right, in which case the rules using it need changing.
We should be pleased this has been highlighted in a non critical situation (England had already won) and hope we can learn from this mistake.
It's better to ask how many times have the TMO correctly solved an issue the refs couldn't see?
Complain about this post
The psychological impact of a decision alters the course of the game such that the end result cannot be justified in its entirity.
Complain about this post
Geoff's comment is the most sensible explanation of the whole affair. I would hate to think that there was any Wilkinson factor having an influence.
As an England fan, I'd have preferred the try not to be given because it takes away from a great victory and a terrific comeback for Jonny.
Complain about this post
Geoff, I think the experts got it wrong. 6.A.7e) of the laws says "The official may be consulted if the referee or touch judge is
unsure if a player was or was not in touch when attempting to
ground the ball to score a try." Therefore, it was a valid thing to look at. A poor decision, but they happen.
Not Scottish or English, just a pedant.
Complain about this post
If Geoff is right (and it would not surprise me, since something similar is the case with video officials in cricket), then the rules are more at fault than the TMO. There needs to be space for discretion in the use of TV officials.
Complain about this post
Geoff you are wrong. TMO's can be used to check if someone is in touch. An example of this I think was done in France two years ago when Scotland scored a try but it was not given because 'apparently' his foot was in touch - it clearly wasn't and we lost the game because of it!!
Complain about this post
Geoff you are wrong. TMO's can be used to check if someone is in touch. An example of this I think was done in France two years ago when Scotland scored a try but it was not given because 'apparently' his foot was in touch - it clearly wasn't and we lost the game because of it!!
Complain about this post
99.9999% of those who saw the replays accept it wasnt a try! But unfortunately these errors keep occuring (Eng V NZ in the Autumn!). Were England denied a try in the first half etc etc etc.
I would be very interested in the TMO explaining the reason(s) for his decision - this is obviously not going to happening for fear of the ruling class (referrees having to admit they are wrong would be a first).
If Geoffs comment are correct (although I believe he is mis-informed) then perhaps the rules need changing.
As it is England won and won well. Scotland lost and lost badly need we say more!
Complain about this post
Geoff you are wrong. TMO's can be used to check if someone is in touch. An example of this I think was done in France two years ago when Scotland scored a try but it was not given because 'apparently' his foot was in touch - it clearly wasn't and we lost the game because of it!!
Complain about this post
Why did the decision need to be referred to the TMO? The linesman was in a perfect position to make the adjudication. Isn't that part of his job?
Complain about this post
Geoff, that's not quite correct. Under law 6A.7(e), The TMO "may be consulted if the referee or touch judge is unsure if a player was or was not in touch when attempting to
ground the ball to score a try."
So the ref could have asked Donal (a) whether Wilkinson was in touch, and (b) what Donal was smoking up in the TMO room.
Complain about this post
Geoff (post 13) seems to be the only person who has understood that the TMO was not wrong to award JW's try. There was a touch judge in a perfect position to make the call as to whether JW's foot had touched the line or not and his flag stayed down. The TMO was asked by the referee, I believe, to rule on whether the ball was touched down legitimately, not whether a foot was in touch since the touch judge had effectively made that call already. Hence, the TMO made the right call in the circumstances. Anyway, even if the try hadn't been given, England would have won the ensuing line-out and scored nearer to the posts. Of course, I'm an arrogant Englishman for saying that, whereas most of the posts I've read recently are from the humble Welsh residents of one-way street who are never in the wrong.
Complain about this post
Geoff, that's not quite correct. Under law 6A.7(e), The TMO "may be consulted if the referee or touch judge is unsure if a player was or was not in touch when attempting to
ground the ball to score a try."
So the ref could have asked Donal (a) whether Wilkinson was in touch, and (b) what Donal was smoking up in the TMO room.
Complain about this post
Martin says 'whether you think the TMO called [it] rightly or wrongly', but the whole post and indeed the whole debate only makes sense given that he called it wrongly. The evidence was clear - unlike the evidence mentioned by some who would like to dispute the Scots' tries.
Geoff at 13 is incorrect, by the way. The TMO is not limited in this way - we've all seen tries disallowed by them before for exactly the reason that Wilkinson's should have been.
Complain about this post
I think the general opinion is:
1) It didn't have any bearing on the result (so what - that is irrelevant)
2) It's swings and roundabouts - each team has bad decisions made against it
3) People are biased depending on their nationality
4) Confusion over the exact rule (I can't believe that the TMO isn't allowed to rule on the incident)
5) A mistake was made
All of these are totally unsatisfactory. Bottom line - and it doesn't matter who the teams were, what the sport is - a person in a position to make the right decision made the wrong decision. What I would like, is to know that that person involved has accepted they made a mistake and will be more careful in the future.
Complain about this post
A TMO can go quite far back, by your logic Comment 13 A TMO cannot look at events outside the goal area which is nonsence because TMO have stopped trys because of stuff happening in the 22 - 10 m area
Complain about this post
I think I am correct in saying that the TMO can only become involved at the request of the referee, and is only able to answer the exact question that is posed. I further believe that the question asked of the TMO relating to Wilkinson's try was along the lines of "Was the ball grounded correctly?" The answer obviously had to be yes.
That leaves the touchjudge to adjudicate the line, and he was the one who got things wrong, although I am sure he was concentrating on the moment Wilkinson actually made contact with the corner flag.
Complain about this post
#8 Good try at muddying the waters there, but 1. You cannot compare a split-second, marginal, refereeing call with a decision based on endless slow motion replays, and 2. I have just watched the game again, and you are wrong in saying that the England jumper was pulled down. Both jumpers had both hands in the air - it was just a bad throw.
Complain about this post
Please ignore my name as this is not an anti-English/anti-Jonny thing (I think JW is a superb player by the way) and I would be arguing the same point if it was a Welsh player whose try had been awarded. My view is that for 85% of the time the technology available allows TMO's to do a great job in accurately ruling on whether a try should be awarded. For the remaining 15% of the time the technology can actually confuse the issue - I can recall several occassions where slowing down a potential try frame-by-frame proves inconclusive and where viewing the try from different angles results in very different views as to the trys validity. In such circumstances it is down to the TMO to decide whether there is any reason not to award the try but ultimately the video replays will remain inconclusive.
With regards to the JW incident it was 100% clear from the 1st replay that his right foot was in touch long before the ball was placed over the line and I cannot imagine that even the most one eyed England fan would disagree. If a try falls into the 'debatable' 15% category then people accept that the decision to award a try is based on the evidence available and that the final decision will be contentious. However if a try falls into the 85% category where a replay proves incontrovertibly that a try was/was not scored and the TMO then takes the opposing view, that is when you have a problem and that is why there is so much fuss about the JW try. I have a theory (which I mentioned to my friend whilst the TMO and ref were communicating with each other) that the noise in the stadium resulted in the ref mishearing the decision of the TMO and the try was awarded incorrectly based on this. However the Ref/TMO are unlikely to admit to this as this would be even more embarrassing than awarding the try incorrectly.
Complain about this post
Look at Jamie Noons try against the all blacks! Just forget about a bad TMO result in a normal rugby game if a try got disallowed because the ref couldn't see it so bloody what!? get on with the game and stop wineing about it your rugby players not footballers. If we had a TMO at my local club I'd be leading the try count for my team!
Complain about this post
personally, looking at the replays, I seem to remember that 2 angles were shown on the tv. only the reverse angle showed jonny's foot touching the ground before the ball (which it indubitably did), whereas in the angle that the replays showed the most (from the front), his foot could not be seen, but both his knee and the ball could. The ball went down fractionally before his knee. I guess that it is not outside the bounds of possibility that the TMO saw that angle and thought that all he was assessing was whether the knee was in touch, not realiseing that the leg was extended, rather than bent (thereby raising the foot higher than the knee) since the foot coudl not be seen. I don't know how many cameras they can review nor indeed what guidelines exist as to how many they should look at (particularly if they believe they are looking at the one which gives them the best view of the incident). Furthermore, I think most people want the game to continue as quickly as possible, so we expect the official to look and make what he thinks is an informed decision. Obviously we could wait for him to look at every single shot in slow motion and then decide, or we could just accept that sometimes people make mistakes, and the nature of sport is such that over a game, or a tournament, these things even themselves out. I am sure that before the 6 nations is over Scotland will get a lucky decision (like the one they got for their first try in fact) and England will get some unlucky ones (like they frequently did when they were the team to beat, if you remember). Move on, everyone, forget it and stop trying to lynch the chap. We all know it wasn't a try, we would have won anyway, drop it, and roll on the weekend!!
Complain about this post
Sorry Wales forever, but your theory is wrong. On the TV coverage you can quite clearly hear the TMO tell the referee, "you can award the try". If you want to check it out for yourself have a look at the highlights on the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Sport website.
Complain about this post
In my opinion it should not have even gone to the TMO, the Touch Judge was inches away from the action he should have informed the ref.the Wilco's foot was in touch before the ball was grounded.TMO's should only be used in the last, very last resort.
Complain about this post
Unfortunately, Wales forever, this clearly wasn't a mistake brought on by miscomunication. With the mic's being clearly heard on TV you could hear the TMO say that the Try could be awarded. He definately gave it. Nice idea though!
It is all rather unfortunate as the TMO clearly is a great tool if used well and the technology was not at fault, the fault all human in this case.
If the technology is ambiguous over a decision am I right in believing that the decision can be given back to the ref who then should go with their gut instinct? In these situations, I think the ref usually is more likely to get it right.
Lastly, just a small point, but can everyone remember that it was not England who gained a try when it wasn't. There was clear interference in the line out leading to the first Scottish try, so the errors in this respect seem to even themselves out (although I do understand that the Jonny try was more clear cut in not being a try!)
Complain about this post
Guy is an English fan then. It leads you to think that there must have been another agenda. Not one against ref's but its almost like they want it to be England V. Ireland for the decider. The ref for Wales Ireland was shocking. Since when is tackling Czekai without the ball not a penalty!!
Complain about this post
Guy is an English fan then. It leads you to think that there must have been another agenda. Not one against ref's but its almost like they want it to be England V. Ireland for the decider. The ref for Wales Ireland was shocking. Since when is tackling Czekai without the ball not a penalty!!
Complain about this post
the evidence that proved conclusively that jonny was in touch wasn't available until about 5 minutes after the try was awarded. almost too convienient.
Complain about this post
I have to admit, I thought it was a try the first three times I saw it in slow motion. On the fourth viewing Moore shouted 'Watch his right foot' and then it became clear.
You win some you lose some. I hate to lose a match if a try like that was the deciding one, but that was not the case on Saturday.
Complain about this post
Thank you Phil Edwards - see what I mean about the the conspiracy theorists!
Can't have just been a human error - there must have been another agenda - a conspiracy to manipulate the outcome of the 6N !!
Does anyone seriously buy this kind of nonsense? If it does come down to an England v Ireland decider will Oliver Stone make a film about it??
Still, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you...
Complain about this post
Aaron
Please accept my apologies if you were being sarcastic, but are you joking?
It was as plain as the nose on your face that he was in touch from the replay shown immediately after - the images that the TMO was looking at. Even the unashamedly English Brian Moore could see it, pointed it out and let out a shocked "Oh no..." when it was given.
Please tell me you were taking the mickey!
Complain about this post
sorry 43 but i dnt agree because although the TMO didnt work in this case, there is much more chance that the touch-judge would find it even more difficult to make the correct decision on which hit the ground first (foot or ball) due to the speed that wilkinson flew into the corner. when i watched the "try" at full-speed i was almost certain that wilko grounded the ball first and didnt even realise that his foot hit the ground as it only made the smallest bit of contact with the ground.
Complain about this post
Nobody has answered the question of what question was asked of the TMO? If the touch judge was happy that it was a try (wrongly on the replays) and all he was asked to review was the grounding then he acted correctly. He cannot say "the ball was grounded but by the way did you see the foot....."
Does anyone remember the first ever video referral? I think it was South Africa v England and an England try was dissallowed - wrongly in my opinion - because the ref asked the wrong question - the TMO was South African!
So what quwstion was asked?
PS The first few replays showed a good try and it was some time - not 5 minutes before the conclusive one was shown. In France the commentators all said try initially.
Complain about this post
Post 29, Andy. That is a completely ridiculous comment. Firstly, rugby referees are not any sort of ruling class. Secondly, referees readily admit that they are often wrong.
Comments like that just don't help anything.
Complain about this post
The TMO got it wrong only IF he was asked was JW's foot in touch. If he was asked about the grounding then he wasn't wrong. Unless someone can definitively say what the TMO was asked then the debate is fairly pointless.
Complain about this post
As much as i believe the television ref is a fantastic idea, it is making refarees more indecisive. on many an occasion where a try would have been given in the absence of technology but the ref's line of sight was blocked, his decisiveness is immediately put to the test. if he feels intimidated by a big player, he'll resort to the TMO to make the decision for him. It is stil a fantastic idea and has resulted in the correct call been given in the majority of cases (JW's being the one exception i can think of-still baffles me how his try was awarded). So the ref's tend to go to the TMO very quickly if in any doubt as it is a safety line for them as it decreases the risk of making a complete hash of a decision, but this does make them less decisive in a close game.
Complain about this post
Iv also noticed a lot of talk about simon taylor's try being illegal due to interference in the line out. iv even heard someone claim it was a knock on! (do these people even play rugby?) I have watched the game back and had a good look at Taylor's try and as far as i can see, it was just a bad throw which Taylor snaffled up. There was no disruption in the line out, no player being pulled down so it's a perfectly legitimate try. (im no TMO but i know im right on this one!) The ref was obviously sure about the legality of the try so felt no need for the video replay. Besides, it made things a bit more interesting with Scotland scoring first at Twickenham!
Complain about this post
Guy. When do referees admit they're wrong in the international game? Referees do need to be held accountable. This isn't so that we can shout at them for getting it wrong, merely that in any other profession, performance is monitored. Referees should be no different.
The question that is meant to be asked by refs of TMOs now is, "is there any reason I cannot award the try?". There was a reason he couldn't award the try.
Complain about this post
At the time of the try, I was amazed that JW had the foresight to take head and body further into touch, to avoid hitting the flag, but I still couldn't believe that he could get the ball down before hitting the flag. It was only with the first few replays that I could see that the ball touched the ground before the flag was hit.
Only after that did we have the luxury of Brian Moore pointing out the foot, and being able to agree with him. It sounded like he got prompted from off-camera, but I bet the TMO can't be.
If I were the TJ, I'd probably have been concentrating on the touch flag rather than 6 feet behind it. To do both would require head/eye movement and time for the eye to re-focus - would that be more than the 3 or 4 frames (0.2 secs) that he really had? I, for one, am not surprised that he couldn't tell.
As for the TMO, I suspect he was concentrating on the area around the ball and touch flag too. I *think* he gets to see the same replays we do on TV, just without the commentary; when you see the frames move back & forth, you can see just what he's really concentrating on. IIRC, in the live coverage, he did this on the shots taken from a camera above in the East stand, and there's no way he'd see the feet there.
Either he didn't look, or he wasn't asked the right question.
I don't recall what the questions was for JW's try, but I'm pretty sure he didn't use the generic "Is there any reason I shouldn't award the try?" for the maul-try in the first half. Wasn't it a statement more like "I'd like you to look at the grounding"?
Complain about this post
As a Scot, I was disappointed that the Jonny Wilkinson "try" was awarded, but that's Rugby - it happens. But let's get real - Scotland didn't deserve anything more from the game. Their performance was abysmal and that's the really important thing about this game.
Complain about this post
Well I can remember an incident for England against Ireland last year when the (Scottish) touch judge started to raise his flag to signal that the Irish player was out but then put his flag down.......yeah ref's are really biased towards England aren't they.
We know it shouldn't have been awarded but niether should your first. and We practically let you walk over for your second. So get over it, you were completely second class on the day... so much so that I still don't know if England were any good or not!
Complain about this post
We all know that with a lot of pressure on us, split second decisions can muddle the mind. Similarly to many of the previous posts I believed it to be a try initially until I saw the infamous foot on the fourth or fifth replay. If you were in the position of the TMO, would you have noticed certain things when asked - with only a few seconds to answer - whether you thought it was a try or not?
I am not trying to defend the decision - just the way in which the TMO could have been mistaken on the spur of the moment.
Overall I do think that the TMO makes a huge difference to the equality of matches and provides a good way for the "armchair" referee to be brought into the game!
Complain about this post
There seems to be a lot of talk about how contraversial Jonny Wilkinsons try was, but a lot of people easily forget that the touch judge called a let out of bounds with one man to take with an overlap which was certain to be a try about ten minutes into the game. The fact that it was a Scottish foot out of bounds and not English seems to be quickly forgotton, and at that early stage of the game could have had an even bigger impact in England's favour, so why not put it aside as the result was pretty fair.
Complain about this post
All this fuss about Jonny's 'try' is ridiculous, and would not be so high profile if it was not England.
Last year a Scottish touch judge put his flag up then changed his mind, Ireland scored a try and won the game against England. It changed the course of the game.
Mistakes are made, usually by the players, sometimes by the officials. Twill always be thus.
Wales were robbed on Sunday by repeated 'mistakes' which had a crucial bearing on the rtesult of the game (and who knows, maybe the result of the 6N. But because England are not the beneficiaries there's scarcely a big fuss made, compared to Jonny's try.
Read the papers. It was a try!
Complain about this post
So WHAT did the referee ask for???
Somebody somewhere must be able to clarify that because I think everyone is generally in favour of the TMO and everyone basically understands the remit - certainly after reading the above.
Surely that will put an end to the arguments.......
Complain about this post
re 68
And I thought Ireland were harshly treated.............
Complain about this post
There is a lot of negative comment coming up that all this debate is 'sour grapes' from Scotland fans adn that the try would have made no difference to the outcome. Secondly there have been a couple of posts citing that if the reverse had happened and English fans had complained afterwards, then they would be labelled arrogant.
Frankly that is total rubbish from fans with obvious chips on their shoulders.
I am a Scotland fan, I readily admit that we were poor adn deserved to lose, but the argument about the try has nothing to do with the outcome or result of the game.
If blatant mistakes like that keep happening then it is surely bad for the sport. In another game where scores were even, that decision could have turned the game. We have video technology for a reason, to prevent bad decisions which can have negative impacts on results. So to brush it off as part of the game is both naive and ridiculous, we should do everything to remove errors to allow the rugby to be the talking point.
Complain about this post
It's "incontrovertible", not "incontrivertible". Also, the evidence cannot be "fairly incontrovertible", either it is or it isn't.
Complain about this post
I'm a Scot & I don't begrudge England the victory on Saturday. They played well as a team & beat a poor Scottish team. Hopefully Frank Hadden will pull the finger out now. However, I would like to see consistency with the TMOs for everyone. If it comes to a tight game between to countries to decide the 6 nations then a TMO error could have massive effects on the outcome.
Complain about this post
Maybe the touch judges should have access to a monitor as well and the decision should be based on all 3 decisions. I.E. The blind TMO says try the two touch judges say line out therefore we go with line out.
Complain about this post
Maybe Union should follow League and allow the TMO to look at anything which might affect the award or not of a try. If so, the TMO could have seen that the pass from O'Gara
to O'Driscoll for Ireland's second try was blatantly forward. You cannot say for certain that that did not affect the outcome.
Complain about this post
I thought that the IRB were changing / had changed the laws regarding the TMO, where rather than leading a specific question the ref should only ask
"is there a reason why I cannot award the try?"
therefore allowing more freedom to the TMO rather than just looking at the grounding etc.
this was debated last year when Ireland scored a try against wales the TMO gave the try because he could not see a reason why not to award the try although due to the bodies in the way he couldn't see the grounding of the ball but it was probable that a try had been scored as there were no welshmen underneath the pile of bodies.
in essence it switches the emphasis in favour of the attacking team
Complain about this post
It wasn't a try, but then again Harry ellis did score and that wasn't given...
Complain about this post