Cockers says TMO is undermining rugby's referees

[TigerCam]

Richard Cockerill, the Leicester director of rugby, has called for the powers of the Television Match Official to be reined back, claiming that the use of technology is undermining the men in the middle.
The TMO became an unfortunate feature of the World Cup group stages with lengthy referrals over marginal foul play decisions dragging halves out to 50 minutes. Even though its use was moderated in the knockout stages as well as the opening rounds of the Six Nations, the TMO still has the capacity to infuriate. At Premiership level, Leicester had two tries disallowed against Newcastle on Friday and yet Cockerill, traditionally not the officials’ closest ally, said that he was not speaking out of self-interest but in support of referees.

“I probably would not have said this two years ago but I think the technology is making the game worse,” Cockerill said. “You just have to go with the flow. Try yes or no, I understand. Foul play, I understand. But it is a bit of a debacle when you have got guys lining up conversions and it comes back.

Leicester had two tries disallowed last week. “My experience of the TMO is that they are coercing the referee into making a decision that they think is right rather than the referee looking at it and saying for me I don’t see that, let’s crack on.
“The good ones, Wayne Barnes, J P Doyle and Nigel Owens, make their own minds up and it’s just common sense. I don’t want a bloke in a wagon outside making those decisions.

“We saw against Newcastle when we scored two tries that were disallowed for knock-ons. The head of English referees and the head of world referees say they are both tries. The bloke in a caravan said they weren’t.

[drc_007]

Unless asked, the TMO should not interject other than for cases of foul play.

[voice of the crumbie]

Unless asked, the TMO should not interject other than for cases of foul play.

+1

[ourla]

“We saw against Newcastle when we scored two tries that were disallowed for knock-ons. The head of English referees and the head of world referees say they are both tries. The bloke in a caravan said they weren’t.

Mmmm... I'd rather he made this statement after the oppo had two tries disallowed.

Also, I am failing to understand the significance of the caravan.

[strawclearer]

Unless asked, the TMO should not interject other than for cases of foul play.

+1

+1

[Tomvarndell]

I'd personally rather the correct decision but feel now that the TMOs are getting involved for less certain decisions. Take the Newcastle game. He was right to pick up the Matt Tait non try. That was blatant and needed correcting. The first try however by Veainu wasn't conclusive enough for him to overrule the refs decision for me. The Stade Francais match where we scored the wonder try that was ruled out for forward pass was also again harsh. It wasn't certain and he should have stayed out of it. Should be like cricket where only bad decisions get over turned not borderline ones.

[G.K]

Somewhat ironic from Cockers. He, and other coaches, Dean Ryan for example, are often complaining about refs making the incorrect decision and yet at the same time is complaining when TMOs intervene to highlight that very same thing?

My problem with this, as with refereeing generally, is the inconsistency of decisions between refs, and now TMOS, between games and within games and different refs ignoring laws as and when they think it helps to 'make the game flow'.

[jgriffin]

I am personally fed up of the TMO. It is a prop for poor refs.
I have been to games where the ref has not asked for TMO and actually heard both JP and Waynetta say ' no thanks, I'm satisfied', having made their own decision. Waynetta vs Wuss I don't remember him using the TMO more than once (the DO'C red card AFAIK). His reffing of that match was decisive and promoted continuity.
I've said all along that TMO should not go back any further than the final breakdown for any other question unless very specifically requested for foul play. Touchdowns should be probability again, as JP did last week - this dissuades the 15 player dive-around farce to stop the TMO getting a view.

[Farmboy]

If the ball is allowed to travel forward due to the momentum of the player with a pass, did the ball on each occasion travel forward relevant to the player when grounding?

[wellstiger]

[quote="jgriffin"]I am personally fed up of the TMO. It is a prop for poor refs.
I have been to games where the ref has not asked for TMO and actually heard both JP and Waynetta say ' no thanks, I'm satisfied', having made their own decision. Waynetta vs Wuss I don't remember him using the TMO more than once (the DO'C red card AFAIK). His reffing of that match was decisive and promoted continuity.

Totally agree.
I also dislike (certain teams) bullying/asking/persuading (if that is the term )Refs into going to TMO.
If any thing only allow either team to refer to TMO Max three times per game
Keep TMO's from directing referees unless serious fowl play or head injury.

[biffer]

1. On field ref (with AR's) should have to make a call one way or the other
2. Coach / Captain should have right of challenge, limited number (2 per game - lose them if ref call upheld)
3. TMO must have conclusive proof to overturn
4. Other than that interject for serious / dangerous foul play only

[biffer]

Keep TMO's from directing referees unless serious fowl play

I fully agree, no-one should be throwing chickens during the game, it's a recent development which I don't like.

[jgriffin]

Keep TMO's from directing referees unless serious fowl play

I fully agree, no-one should be throwing chickens during the game, it's a recent development which I don't like.

They should be up before the Beak for that!

[trendylfj]

I absolutely agree with the TMO bringing to the attention of the ref "serious foul play" if he has missed it. The rest should be on an "if asked" basis. No coming back for technical infringements unless asked, only two questions regarding a try - "is there any reason I can't award a try" or "try or no try".

[fleabane]

Please don't let us go down the "challenges - 2 per game" route.

That further moves the refs authority. In a game where challenging the ref is just not accepted, that process opens the door to to just that, and is a slippery slope. On top of that, the group discussion, the delay in returning to players positions for the next " play" will ring the game closer to the American Football model.

Decisions on forward passes, crossing etc should be left to the ref and the assistants.
Once a try is given, it stays given.

The TMO should:
Draw the refs attention to suspected foul play
Respond only when asked a specific question by the ref
Only get the option of " is there any reason I cannot award that try?"
Only be able to review whether the ball has actually crossed the line, continuous movement, properly grounded, not knocked on. If the TMO cannot see an offence, or the ball under a pile of players, the try stands.

That stops the farce of denying a try because there is not a camera angle available.