TMO vs. Quins

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

sam16111986
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4704
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:27 pm
Location: Shepshed

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by sam16111986 » Mon May 17, 2021 9:41 am

westwinds31 wrote:
Sun May 16, 2021 11:28 pm
You can try and make the case for Genge all day and night but he made contact with the head. Not intentional or foul play, but....yes....he still made contact with the head, so yellow. What’s he supposed to do ?, someone asked me - not clear out, he came from a long way back. Don’t bother going in there. The sooner we accept it’s a yellow or red card offence the better, including the players. What is bizarre is the moaning on here and we won !!! Now that’s bizarre.
The law isn't to stop clear outs or dominant tackles the focus is all on stopping reckless play and ensuring players use proper technique. I am all I'm favour of that and Genge did neither hence why the ref wanted to play on before insistence from others led to a card. We've seen Ludlum for Saints and Barton for Glaws escape direct shoulder to head tackles that led to HIAs because they went low and made a perfectly legitimate attempt to tackle. Genge made as legitimate an attempt as he could make to clear out, I thought that was really poor from Barnes and the TMO to intervene after the ref had reviewed the footage and decided it was play on.

CrumblingTerrace
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by CrumblingTerrace » Mon May 17, 2021 10:07 am

Genge's yellow card was a fascinating look at officiating influence/authority. Luke Pearce made the decision that it wasn't foul play and was ready to move on. His officiating team held him there and manoeuvred him round to a particular decision.

You could see that as the officials working well together as a team, or you could see that as the referee's absolute authority being diluted.

DingDong
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:06 am

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by DingDong » Mon May 17, 2021 10:16 am

The paranoia about any contact with the head is starting to spoil the game. You can make perfectly legal contact with a players head and it not be a penalised offence. You only have to look at the pick and go's attacking the try line, virtually every contact in that area makes contact with the head.

In Gengey's incident, he clearly targeted and made initial contact with the defenders shoulder blade, and in the process of wrapping his arm lightly made contact with his head. It was a balanced and controlled clear out. The RFU logic tree for foul play did not apply in this incident, except that two weak referees decided to 'tick boxes' and interpret with no empathy to the situation and therefore sell it to themselves.

Having spoken to several decent level referees over the weekend, they are all unanimous that it was a poor performance from that team of referees. You'd think at that level of expertise and with all the technology a blatant offside at a kick chase would be no problem, apparently not! Refs are human and make mistakes and we go with it, but that was a ridiculous mistake even at lower level reffing without the AR's and technology.

Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7401
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Scott1 » Mon May 17, 2021 11:13 am

westwinds31 wrote:
Sun May 16, 2021 11:28 pm
You can try and make the case for Genge all day and night but he made contact with the head. Not intentional or foul play, but....yes....he still made contact with the head, so yellow. What’s he supposed to do ?, someone asked me - not clear out, he came from a long way back. Don’t bother going in there. The sooner we accept it’s a yellow or red card offence the better, including the players. What is bizarre is the moaning on here and we won !!! Now that’s bizarre.
But it’s not a yellow card that’s the point. Pearce seemed to be the only one who knew the laws but was somehow talked out of applying them correctly.
https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/17

There was no foul play,Pearce even said as such so it isn’t a yellow. How can you go against the laws? Very strange for me!
Last edited by Scott1 on Mon May 17, 2021 11:16 am, edited 2 times in total.

daktari
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:23 am
Location: UK

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by daktari » Mon May 17, 2021 11:14 am

The guidelines are clear - if there is contact with the head but no illegal action, its play on. The TMO essentially badgered the ref live on TV until he caved. Something needs to be done about the TMO, they are going beyond their remit and ruining the game
find a better way of life, http://www.marillion.com

marillion 19, coming ....er not sure..

Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7401
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Scott1 » Mon May 17, 2021 11:15 am

daktari wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 11:14 am
The guidelines are clear - if there is contact with the head but no illegal action, its play on. The TMO essentially badgered the ref live on TV until he caved. Something needs to be done about the TMO, they are going beyond their remit and ruining the game
Yes just posted the link to World Rugby laws,can’t get my head around how Pearce got the decision spot on to the letter of the law but was talked into changing his mind.

Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7401
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Scott1 » Mon May 17, 2021 11:23 am

Seems to be a touch of the Mandela effect going on with this head contact malarkey. Where has “its contact with the head so it has be a yellow” come from?! Certainly not the laws!

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3584
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by ourla » Mon May 17, 2021 11:30 am

I thought the Genge yellow and the no clear and obvious offside calls were correct even though as a Tigers fan I had to fight my natural bias to accept it.

However, I do think there is a conversation to be add about whether the TMO should show the evidence to the ref and leave it to them to make the decision or whether they should make the decision for them. My gut instinct is the former but I am not certain as perhaps the TMO is has better viewing equipment, is somewhat isolated from the environment, has fewer things to deal with, etc. The officials, coaches, etc. should probably have a tête-à-tête and figure it out.
You're either in or you're out

Noggs
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 11:41 am
Location: Leicestershire

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Noggs » Mon May 17, 2021 3:06 pm

ourla wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 11:30 am
I thought the Genge yellow and the no clear and obvious offside calls were correct even though as a Tigers fan I had to fight my natural bias to accept it.

However, I do think there is a conversation to be add about whether the TMO should show the evidence to the ref and leave it to them to make the decision or whether they should make the decision for them. My gut instinct is the former but I am not certain as perhaps the TMO is has better viewing equipment, is somewhat isolated from the environment, has fewer things to deal with, etc. The officials, coaches, etc. should probably have a tête-à-tête and figure it out.
The ref is always (or should be) the decision maker. The others are there as extra sets of eyes and to offer their opinion as to what has happened
Life can be unpredictable, so eat your pudding first!

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3584
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by ourla » Mon May 17, 2021 3:37 pm

Noggs wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 3:06 pm
The ref is always (or should be) the decision maker. The others are there as extra sets of eyes and to offer their opinion as to what has happened
I understand that is yours and many peoples opinions. But that is clearly up for debate currently. And my point really was, that it needs clarifying. Because, rightly or wrongly, on the Genge yellow, the referee made a decision and was told otherwise by the TMO. As a fan I can live with either but I think for all concerned it would be better for it be known and adhered to. It's quote possible next week in the same situation the TMO will defer to the refs view. And that inconsistency is a problem.
You're either in or you're out

Pellsey
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 645
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Pellsey » Mon May 17, 2021 4:21 pm

Scott1 wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 11:13 am
westwinds31 wrote:
Sun May 16, 2021 11:28 pm
You can try and make the case for Genge all day and night but he made contact with the head. Not intentional or foul play, but....yes....he still made contact with the head, so yellow. What’s he supposed to do ?, someone asked me - not clear out, he came from a long way back. Don’t bother going in there. The sooner we accept it’s a yellow or red card offence the better, including the players. What is bizarre is the moaning on here and we won !!! Now that’s bizarre.
But it’s not a yellow card that’s the point. Pearce seemed to be the only one who knew the laws but was somehow talked out of applying them correctly.
https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/17

There was no foul play,Pearce even said as such so it isn’t a yellow. How can you go against the laws? Very strange for me!
Many thanks for finding this, Scott. The misapplication of this process is, IMHO, the reason for the insane number of cards at the moment ruining the game.

CrumblingTerrace
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by CrumblingTerrace » Mon May 17, 2021 4:36 pm

ourla wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 3:37 pm
Noggs wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 3:06 pm
The ref is always (or should be) the decision maker. The others are there as extra sets of eyes and to offer their opinion as to what has happened
I understand that is yours and many peoples opinions. But that is clearly up for debate currently. And my point really was, that it needs clarifying.
It's clear in the laws:

'The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match'... '

The referee may consult with assistant referees about matters relating to their duties, the law relating to foul play and timekeeping, and may request assistance related to other aspects of the referee’s duties

The challenge, as ever, is interpretation of them. I think what we saw at the weekend was the TMO providing the judgement of fact and the application of the laws, contrary to the referee's view.

Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7401
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by Scott1 » Mon May 17, 2021 5:15 pm

Pellsey wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 4:21 pm
Scott1 wrote:
Mon May 17, 2021 11:13 am
westwinds31 wrote:
Sun May 16, 2021 11:28 pm
You can try and make the case for Genge all day and night but he made contact with the head. Not intentional or foul play, but....yes....he still made contact with the head, so yellow. What’s he supposed to do ?, someone asked me - not clear out, he came from a long way back. Don’t bother going in there. The sooner we accept it’s a yellow or red card offence the better, including the players. What is bizarre is the moaning on here and we won !!! Now that’s bizarre.
But it’s not a yellow card that’s the point. Pearce seemed to be the only one who knew the laws but was somehow talked out of applying them correctly.
https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/17

There was no foul play,Pearce even said as such so it isn’t a yellow. How can you go against the laws? Very strange for me!
Many thanks for finding this, Scott. The misapplication of this process is, IMHO, the reason for the insane number of cards at the moment ruining the game.
I can't take the credit I'm afraid,Tiglon posted the link. Thanks Tiglon. But your point is what I am trying to get across,to no avail it seems. Where has this "its head contact so its a yellow come from"? It's not in the laws as we have now all seen. Pearce got it absolutely spot on to the letter of the law at first and was somehow persuaded wrongly by his TMO. And like you said its happening all the time.

GETHIN EXILE
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by GETHIN EXILE » Mon May 17, 2021 6:57 pm

The Genge yellow should never have been yellow. The quins player was already off his feet laying on top of the ruck and had his hands on the ground before Genge arrived so was commiting an offence that should have been a penalty to tigers.

voice of the crumbie
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:25 pm
Location: coalville

Re: TMO vs. Quins

Post by voice of the crumbie » Mon May 17, 2021 7:08 pm

Interesting to note law 5a of World Rugby Laws which states:

The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match. The referee must apply the laws of the game fairly in every match. (My bold.)

Also the World Rugby document covering the global trial of the TMO linked to below states under the guiding principles for the role inter alia that the TMO is "a tool to assist referees and assistant referees", that the referee is "not subservient to the system" and crucially "The referee is the decision-maker and must remain in charge of the game." (Again my bold.)

https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugb ... 019_EN.pdf

Clearly not being used as intended. It seems that certain referees (we all know who)are abrogating their responsibilities. Whereas others e.g. a certain Mr Barnes are confident to make the final decision after consultation. This begs the question as to whether those who don't make the final decision are fit to / capable of refereeing at the top level.

I believe there is a post match referee performance assessment. I wonder how many times in this process it is noted that the referee abrogated the final decision to the TMO :smt017

Posters can draw their own conclusions.
Tigers for the premiership and European Cup. Get behind the team and make some noise!!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Craig123, Google [Bot], LittleBigG, sam16111986 and 2 guests