LittleBigG wrote:I really think that it needs to be written down in black and white exactly what they are allowed/are not allowed to ask/do
6.A.7 Referee consulting with others
LAW AMENDMENT TRIAL
(b) A match organiser may appoint an official known as a Television Match Official (TMO) who uses technological devices to clarify situations relating to;
(i) When there is doubt as to whether a ball has been grounded in in-goal for a score or a touchdown.
(ii) Where there is doubt as to whether a kick at goal has been successful.
(iii) Where there is doubt as to whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding the ball in in-goal or the ball has been made dead.
(iv) Where match officials believe an offence or infringement may have occurred in the field of play leading to a try or preventing a try.
(v) Reviewing situations where match officials believe foul play may have occurred.
(vi) Clarifying sanctions required for acts of foul play.
LittleBigG wrote:What would happen if after getting an intercept the referee pulled it back to "look at foul play" which turns out not to be an infringement at all?
On a turnover, if he saw foul play then he would blow straight away. If he suspected a chance of foul play he'd continue play until a score or when the ball becomes dead then check, so if there was no infringement - there'd be no injustice - theoretically!!
We knew we were going to get a stop start game when Whistle happy Wigglesworth was appointed to this match, but in the boxing day game he surpassed himself now is he not only whistle happy but also brainless
almost every time somebody touched the ball down over the line his indecisiveness and constant TMO replays were mind numbing. He was right about Veinu but very wrong about Mathew Tait's disallowed try.
The excellent Nigel Owens shows great temerity in the use of the TMO, he constantly backs himself in some decisions regardless of the TMO's request. Whilst this is to be greatly admired, put yourself in the shoes of the side that is 4pts up and the opposition score a try in the last play for which the ref declares 'there was nothing wrong with that'. The TMO then requests the ref to look at the grounding, do you then admire that ref who backs himself and declines that second look?
(6.A.4 The duties of the referee in the playing enclosure (a) The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match).
In the case of Telusa's and Taity's(?) fumbles, that would of potentially been 14pts incorrectly awarded, had Wigglseworth not listened to the TMO!
Wigglesworths mistake was to initially say 'looked fine to me', his reply to the TMO request should either be 'no thank you, i'm happy with that' then leave the slo-mo crowd to dissect and debate, or he should've said 'Yes go ahead, try yes or no'.
I don't see the problem or any reason for moaning as Tait clearly had no downward pressure at all, he tried to rescue the situation by keeping contact with his fingertips on the side of the rolling ball but at no point did he have any downward pressure, difficult enough to see in slow motion so near impossible to spot in real time.
The Balmain yellow card was fair as was the Agulla yellow card, Agulla let go of his man but he had little choice as the tackled player (Croft) rolled over Goneva's back, unfortunate but Agulla was the cause so yellow was harsh but fair enough.
The scrum was what it was, put a 5ft 8" lightweight Thacker between 6ft 4" Mulipola and 6ft 1" Balmain and the opposition props will angle in when that Leicester pyramid folds on the middle, even on the engage the weight was too much to hold, it isn't kids rugby and these packs are seriously heavy.
Yeah, just re-watched the Fraser tackle and it is, ironically, one of those instances that looks worse in real-time than in slow-mo. Definitely yellow; completely reckless.
The ref asks for clarification - fine. Should never go back phase after phase however - becomes ludicrous. The TMO spots an act of cardable foul play regardless of whether it is relevant to the act of scoring. Fine.
The ref awards a try. He is happy and says so. This is where it gets silly. Owens and Barnes have both declined TMO this season, backing their judgement. For me, they are head and shoulders above the rest currently because they back their judgement, and in the case of Owens, since he reverted to 'old-style' reffing a couple of years ago, improved hugely to become one of two or three top refs. Leighton Hodges is another no-nonsense ref on the way up. Wigglesworth to me acts like a man with little confidence, clearly needs a bit of Spreaders' counselling.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.
jgriffin wrote:Wigglesworth to me acts like a man with little confidence,
Not just little confidence but with little idea of what's actually going on - particularly in the scrum. I'm not just referring to Saturday's game but the numerous occasions I have seen him at Welford Road.
Tigers for the premiership and European Cup. Get behind the team and make some noise!!
Only watched the game live from the terrace and from what we could see , frazier looked like he was on his knees when he lifted the player and at first glance it looked an ok tackle, as for wigglesworth and the Tmo, both the ruled out tries where given by wigglesworth but then the tmo said they need looking at, so wigglesworth cant be held responsible for them.... Why cant the tmo go back to how it was and only get involved if asked to do so
The Boy Dave wrote:I don't see the problem or any reason for moaning as Tait clearly had no downward pressure at all, he tried to rescue the situation by keeping contact with his fingertips on the side of the rolling ball but at no point did he have any downward pressure, difficult enough to see in slow motion so near impossible to spot in real time.
The Balmain yellow card was fair as was the Agulla yellow card, Agulla let go of his man but he had little choice as the tackled player (Croft) rolled over Goneva's back, unfortunate but Agulla was the cause so yellow was harsh but fair enough.
The scrum was what it was, put a 5ft 8" lightweight Thacker between 6ft 4" Mulipola and 6ft 1" Balmain and the opposition props will angle in when that Leicester pyramid folds on the middle, even on the engage the weight was too much to hold, it isn't kids rugby and these packs are seriously heavy.
Maybe I'm wrong (it happens) but I'm sure that there is no requirement for downward pressure. If there was any contact between Tait's hand/fingers/thumb at the point that the ball made contact with the quagmire, it should have been a try.
No doubt, I'll be corrected by the brains trust
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man
