0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
We seem to have got on to a debate about TMO.
It is funny how Rugby survived 100+ years without a TMO. That's why we went to the pub after the match to whinge about. Now they are so intrusive that we are unable to go a full match without the TMO intruding and stopping play for something that happened 2 minutes prior.
I wonder if the current uproar about the TMO whilst obviously related to the missed high shot by that evil bastard Swinton. Who had the misfortune of whacking our player. Had he not done this would we still be having the argument? Is this our collective Blue shaded goggles getting in the way of the bigger picture?
Personally - I would like to see less TMO involvement. For Referees to confidently call a match - and for us the spectators to have confidence in their calls. Yes - On occasion something will be missed. It happens - Referees are humans. We have no right to expect perfection.
Exile
Port Macquarie
"Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain’t all sunshine and rainbows. It’s a very mean and nasty place and I don’t care how tough you are it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain’t about how hard ya hit. It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That’s how winning is done! Now if you know what you’re worth then go out and get what you’re worth. But ya gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain’t where you wanna be because of him, or her, or anybody! Cowards do that and that ain’t you! You’re better than that!" - Rocky Balboa
There is also still a massive influence from the home ground and broadcasters. The broadcasters choose what replays to show and then the crowd can influence the referees with booing etc. If it was a force home game I am sure it would have got picked up.
I worry about how this aspect will be handled in France and the advantages they might get
Yeah im of the same thinking as you on the interjection of the TMO, but whether it happened to us, Crusaders, Cheetahs, Saracens etc i would hope that if the neutral doctor calls a player for HIA that the TMO would call stop and sort it out. Never mind that the touchies should be onto it before then as well. Obviously collisions are going to happen but incidents like the mug on the weekend well thats just plain amateur hour from the professionals in charge.
Same questionable officiating happened with the Drua Brumbies game as well.
I agree with less of the TMO, it was horrendous last year. They have made a decision of less input but I believe they were to intervene in acts of foul play.
I think the on field ref should be the only one in charge and be able to refer to the TMO. The TMO should only intervene in acts of dangerous play and if referred to. Gardner asking the TMO if in touch or not should not of been shutdown but a "Yes sir".
Would I still be having this argument. Yes in the case of a HIA, yes.
I can't remember the game from last year but there was 2 incidents in one game at HBF where the doctor had to yell at the Touchie to recognise there was a player knocked out on the field
Edit:
Searched and found my comment from at the time. It was Kahui and Winchester against the Hurricanes. 28th of May
I have noticed a lot more instances of players staying down in the last 2 seasons or so in the hope of a TMO review leading to a card, which is making it tougher for the officials.
Absolutely not an excuse for this case though.
I do also believe there is a second TMO now who is there to review yellow/red card officials so the main TMO can continue with the live game. So there should be 2 TMO's looking for foul play.
Unfortunately they often appear to be concentrating on far less important matters and intersecting when they shouldn't.
Most of the tv watchers saw itI'm confident they all only had one set of eyes and one screen.Add a revind facility and it's an easy check.For the record, I didn't pick up obvious bias from this ref, however he certainly changed the way he reffed the breakdown from previous matches, virtually ignoring jackalers, or penalizing them unless it was instant, perfectly clean etc. Tackled players were given ages to release the ball.This did, however, go both ways and it's almost as if the tahs knew in advance to counterruck, not put hands on the ball..The two poor non calls were Swinton, who should have played 2 minutes of that match and vailanus foot in touch which resulted in a try and was refused to be reviewed.On those two incidents, I believe they are so glaringly controversial that some public statement is required.Tahs fans also mention Jorgenson being collared during a contest for the high ball which I thought was 2 players competing in the air and it was called that way.A rare bad performance from Gus Gardner imho
C'mon the![]()
![]()
I fuggin hope not.I don't think my tv would survive Turinui and Maloney bleating about how this penalty is too harsh because he's a great bloke who plays hard and Australian rugby needs more players like him.I have noted that the judiciary have made no mention of previous record in their statement, despite this commonly being mentioned when reducing a sanction. It goes both ways doesn't it?
C'mon the![]()
![]()
So...to be clearFIVE professional referees missed the Swinton assault?Upon listening to cronnys interview on pick n drive it also appears that the medical officials cleared him to return to the field despite being "non verbal" It's starting to sound too bad to be mere incompetence, especially since I hear nothing about refs being sat down a week for such a shitty performance.
C'mon the![]()
![]()