Get rid of technology

[Rugga-lad]

This may sound radical, but for the good of the game i think it's necessary.

Sure it certainly has helped in awarding or disallowing a lot of tries, but the stoppages, for one, are and has been ruining the game. The worst is the TMO's don't even get it right. And then the question is, where do we go from here ? Now there's talk of having 2 referees on the field. I've said for a long time, that refereeing has become worse since technology has been introduced. And it's just getting worse all the time.

I say, have the referee make the call all the time. If he cannot see it, he doesn't award it, be it a try or whatever. Even if the players see it. Like in the old days. The onus is all on the ref to make the correct call, and he and the IRB Refereeing System have a duty to train as hard as possible to get the calls right.

Back to basics.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

A consideration to bear in mind though is in the 'old days' the TV viewer didn't necessarily get the view of a missed incident replayed at all angles and were non the wiser so the perception was of a better quality of refereeing while that might not have been the actual case. I'm not saying it is or isn't but surely it is a factor in how we percieve refereeing performances ATM?

 

[Rugga-lad]

Well, you have a point, but i still think refereeing has become worse since technology has been introduced. It's like they are shoving some responsibility, and do not mind that the TMO corrects them. Whereas, if they have full responsibility, they would have to give an exceptional performance each time they go out to ref.

 

[Big Ewis]

I see where you're coming from (you have a flag and the Boks logo on your profile) but I disagree. Just like weed, technology makes everything better, provided you use it reasonably and don't overuse it.

I always even thought in the distant future, if there were some way the ball could be interactive with the ground during the grounding for a try. During all those really close tries hard to call for a ref, or those mauls crashing in on as many defenders in the goal area and it's a complete mess - a way to assess objectively, through whatever technology, that the attacking ball carrier has indeed made contact with the ground while holding the ball and applying downward pressure.

Anything to make the game fair as possible, rigidly objective, rid of any subjectivity and hesitation, and impossible for refs to make decision mistakes (whether intentional or accidental). If there were a way to monitor the game 100% electronically, without the players having to be subjected to whatever physical constraints of any sort, i.e. move as freely on the field - then that's the way to go without a doubt for me.
Technology (not just in sports) is man's friend. Its core definition is to make life easier/more efficient for human beings. If it doesn't do exactly that, then it has superseded its function and isn't used fairly anymore.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I think there should be an informal time limit for the TMO, there have been cases where everyone can see an obvious incident within seconds on the replay and yet the TMO does it again and again and again well beyond what is needed to make a decision. I have no problem with going to the TMO but I do hate how they can take a stupidly long time to make a very simply decision.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I want the TMO referal more of a spectacle;

Record the action in full 3D and on review have the replay projected onto the pitch in a holographic 7x life size presentation for the fans to enjoy a replay of the.. er play and for the ref to walk around like a mouse inspecting it from whichever perspective he needs to.

 

[Andre8]

Yes, TMO is slowing the game down but I think it's necessary. What annoys me a lot is players shouting at the ref, asking him to have a look at the TMO for a possible foul play. That really annoys me, also because players start acting more than playing..don't you think?!

 

[j'nuh]

There are maybe one or two TMO decisions a game. It's well worth the small time spent on it, on getting something important, right.

If you really want to increase the pace of the game, sort out scrums, lineouts and penalties. There's a lot of time wasted on players ambling towards them. I'd like to see a 20 or 30 second set-up period, where a team is penalised for not getting ready in that time for a scrum/lineout, and for penalties to need to be taken within 30 seconds rather than a full minute. And whoever can stop the constant re-setting of scrums deserves a medal.

 

[Big Ewis]

yeah but players need a breather too. Nothing wrong overall with our int'l Test Rugby, as fans we can spare a couple of minutes every once in a while per game, it's okay, we're not politicians or what not, our time isn't worth all that much...

 

[Pedro]

I like having replays available to the ref

Been a TV fan for 4 years, been to 1 test and to 1 international B tournament. Here is what I think given my humble and limited experience

I like how the TMO is used. Not every call needs video review. The three on the field can make most calls. I agree that this technology may detract from the referee's ability to control the game...if he lets it. Hearing the conversation between the TMO and the referree, it is usually the case, but the ref should always have the final decision.

Having been to a few international quality matches...I missed the benefits of TV. Of course, I missed the replays, but what I missed most was hearing the referee interpreting his calls with the players and the TMO. IMHO, allowing the fans within the grounds to hear this interchange with headsets would make live viewing so much better, improve understanding of the sport and increase the numbers of people willing to go to a stadium to see a match. The view is so much better on TV, give the live audience the audio, and I would want to go again.

 

[smartcooky]

This may sound radical, but for the good of the game i think it's necessary.

Sure it certainly has helped in awarding or disallowing a lot of tries, but the stoppages, for one, are and has been ruining the game. The worst is the TMO's don't even get it right. And then the question is, where do we go from here ? Now there's talk of having 2 referees on the field. I've said for a long time, that refereeing has become worse since technology has been introduced. And it's just getting worse all the time.

I say, have the referee make the call all the time. If he cannot see it, he doesn't award it, be it a try or whatever. Even if the players see it. Like in the old days. The onus is all on the ref to make the correct call, and he and the IRB Refereeing System have a duty to train as hard as possible to get the calls right.

Back to basics.

What a great idea... let all the tens of thousands of people at the ground, and the millions of fans watching on TV, know that the referee has committed an enormous critical blunder, but keep the referee completely in the dark about it.

Genius!

 

[IWasAPirateOnce]

I wouldn't say we need to be rid of it altogether. There have been issues highlighted for sure, but nothing in my mind that couldn't be addressed. Just as there has been tinkering with scrum rules over the past while, I've no doubt that TMO use could be optimised eventually with the right measures taken. I certainly wouldn't advocate scrapping it altogether, let's no overlook the benefits it brings.

 

[Icemn]

I think it is also the question the ref is asking, "is there any reason not to award the try" or " try/no try", then I'm not sure how many phases back the tmo can go to go look for a reason, meaning in the refs mind its already a try unless he missed something...

What ****** me off more is the big screens at games showing incidents and influencing games as a result of bias home broadcasters

I know how the british media is and its world cup time soon aswell and this is my biggest concern. If you want to show offenses on the big screen, be consistent then, show both sides offenses then not just the away team etc

Communication is vital

 

[smartcooky]

IMO, the TMO protocols need some refinement and simplification

Here is what I would do

Tries
Use a similar method that the NRL use for the Video Ref, and the Play Review in NFL. If the referee is uncertain as to whether a legitimate try has been scored, he decides which he thinks is most likely. He says "Try" or "No-Try" and hands the job over the TMO. He can tell the TMO to check certain things such as obstruction or offside in the lead up (up to two rucks/mauls back). The TMO now becomes the sole judge if whether not it was a try. NO REPLAYS are allowed to be shown at the ground until after the TMO makes his decision. The TMO can only overturn the referee's decision if he sees clear and obvious proof that the decision is wrong, if there is any doubt, the on-field decision stands.

Foul Play
The broadcaster must not show replays of foul play once the TMO has identified that he is looking at it, or once the Referee or AR has reported it and has asked the TMO to look.

The referee may ask the TMO to identify the player who committed an act of foul play

The TMO may bring Foul Play to the attention of the Referee....
1. If time is "on", only if it happened less than one minute (elapsed game time) previously.
2. If time is "off", only if it happened no more than two rucks/mauls before time was called off.

If the Referee awards a Yellow Card, the TMO may correct him if he has carded the wrong player.

Before a Red Card is issued the referee MUST get the TMO to positively identify that the correct player is being Red Carded.

TMO Additional powers
The TMO may "call in" other aspects of play as follows

1. If the wrong ball is used at a quick throw in
2. If the ball has been touched by another player before a quick throw in,
3. If a player goes into touch.
4. If the an AR's or referee's call as who put the ball into touch, touch in goal, or over the dead ball line, is incorrect


Ill add other thing if I think of them

 

[SeloShop]

Is there some performance measurement for referees? i.e. they get some sort of negative grading for sending too many decisions to the TMO? I don't think the system is wrong - there just needs to be a way of discouraging refs from using it unless it is absolutely necessary.

 

[Rugga-lad]

What a great idea... let all the tens of thousands of people at the ground, and the millions of fans watching on TV, know that the referee has committed an enormous critical blunder, but keep the referee completely in the dark about it.

Genius!

It doesn't matter what the crowd says. The Ref's decision is final. Look at how the Bok penalty that sunk the All Blacks at Ellis Park was influenced by the crowd. It's ridiculous. If the ref didn't see it, he didn't see it.