Ian Tempest, take careful note of this just decision and next time think twice about being over zealous in your wish to wield the red card!
A key part of the defence was previously unseen camera angles that weren't available to TMO or Tempest. The hearing took five hours as well and required Murley to give evidence stating initial contact was actually the shoulder. I'm glad Ashton is free to play but I don't think we can blame Tempest for angles he didn't see, testimony he didn't have and not taking five hours to make the decision.
Not that I rate Tempest particularly highly but from the replays BT showed of the incident it looked a red. Just a shame the RFU insisted on doing the hearing on the Thursday, that was a bit of a douche move.
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
Completely agree about the Thursday hearing though.
Ian Tempest, take careful note of this just decision and next time think twice about being over zealous in your wish to wield the red card!
A key part of the defence was previously unseen camera angles that weren't available to TMO or Tempest. The hearing took five hours as well and required Murley to give evidence stating initial contact was actually the shoulder. I'm glad Ashton is free to play but I don't think we can blame Tempest for angles he didn't see, testimony he didn't have and not taking five hours to make the decision.
Not that I rate Tempest particularly highly but from the replays BT showed of the incident it looked a red. Just a shame the RFU insisted on doing the hearing on the Thursday, that was a bit of a douche move.
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
Completely agree about the Thursday hearing though.
It specifically states there were angles not available to him. I dunno the technical bits around that.
Pellsey wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 9:58 am
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
It's a little disingenuous to suggest he 'didnt bother' to review other angles. The folk in the truck know what replays are available - the ref is dependent on them.
Pellsey wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 9:58 am
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
It's a little disingenuous to suggest he 'didnt bother' to review other angles. The folk in the truck know what replays are available - the ref is dependent on them.
OK, I'll rephrase... he was very quick to make his decision using only one or two angles.
A key part of the defence was previously unseen camera angles that weren't available to TMO or Tempest. The hearing took five hours as well and required Murley to give evidence stating initial contact was actually the shoulder. I'm glad Ashton is free to play but I don't think we can blame Tempest for angles he didn't see, testimony he didn't have and not taking five hours to make the decision.
Not that I rate Tempest particularly highly but from the replays BT showed of the incident it looked a red. Just a shame the RFU insisted on doing the hearing on the Thursday, that was a bit of a douche move.
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
Completely agree about the Thursday hearing though.
It specifically states there were angles not available to him. I dunno the technical bits around that.
I suspect that Tigers had their own cameras at the ground (e.g. the ones used for matchday video's) if one of those had a clearer angle of the shoulder impact happening before the head then we may have submitted those as evidence, whether BT had videos proving similar or not
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Surely there were other angles available, which he could view but just did not bother. BT definitely showed the worst.
Completely agree about the Thursday hearing though.
It specifically states there were angles not available to him. I dunno the technical bits around that.
I suspect that Tigers had their own cameras at the ground (e.g. the ones used for matchday video's) if one of those had a clearer angle of the shoulder impact happening before the head then we may have submitted those as evidence, whether BT had videos proving similar or not
The match was on PRTV and the number of cameras are a few less than a BT Live game. Tigers have cameras dotted around the stadium which are used for video analysis so guess that this is what was used to support the challenge to the red card.
Similarly, if the angles (available to the TMO) don't give a clear view then neither the ref nor TMO should over interpret.
A single camera only gives a 2 dimensional view and that can be deceptive. An overhead shot may tell you if a foot is beyond the touchline but not if it is grounded (unless it is marking the turf), but combine it with a horizontal shot you will see if the foot is up or down at the time it is over the line.
Other than if the ref or touch judge has seen it directly, should reds be issued on limited views?
I sit in the Crumble opposite side to the incident, I and the people around me said immediately that the initial impact had been to the shoulder and had ridden up, this view was confirmed to us when we saw the replay on the big screen, personally I think Tempest saw what he wanted to see his as he did slightly earlier in the match when he judged the taking out of Brown in the air for which he had already signalled a penalty advantage was actually a knock on by Brown. I would hope that someone somewhere is privately questioning why and how he arrived at that decision.
At this point saying they had angles after is great for us - but if they hadn’t existed we would have been punished…
Here’s a novel idea.
Ask the impacted player if they felt the hit was unreasonable. Knowing that it would be reviewed by video arbitration afterwards and if the impacted player lies/is prudent with the truth then they can be sanctioned by the process after.
Would bring some honesty and perspective to the process which the referee on pitch can’t influence.
johnthegriff wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 11:10 am
I sit in the Crumble opposite side to the incident, I and the people around me said immediately that the initial impact had been to the shoulder and had ridden up, this view was confirmed to us when we saw the replay on the big screen, personally I think Tempest saw what he wanted to see his as he did slightly earlier in the match when he judged the taking out of Brown in the air for which he had already signalled a penalty advantage was actually a knock on by Brown. I would hope that someone somewhere is privately questioning why and how he arrived at that decision.
I think the Brown incident was even more clear cutting the Ashton incident. The Quins player was not properly competing for the ball and to say Brown jumped over him is hogwash. It reminds me of Hanro's red a couple of seasons ago where he stayed on the ground to catch a kick off and the opposition player jumped over him and tumbled on his shoulder.
johnthegriff wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 11:10 am
I sit in the Crumble opposite side to the incident, I and the people around me said immediately that the initial impact had been to the shoulder and had ridden up, this view was confirmed to us when we saw the replay on the big screen, personally I think Tempest saw what he wanted to see his as he did slightly earlier in the match when he judged the taking out of Brown in the air for which he had already signalled a penalty advantage was actually a knock on by Brown. I would hope that someone somewhere is privately questioning why and how he arrived at that decision.
I think the Brown incident was even more clear cutting the Ashton incident. The Quins player was not properly competing for the ball and to say Brown jumped over him is hogwash. It reminds me of Hanro's red a couple of seasons ago where he stayed on the ground to catch a kick off and the opposition player jumped over him and tumbled on his shoulder.
Agreed!
Even with the viewed angles for the Ashton incident, there were still a lot of people
who thought this should have been yellow.
Every time I’ve seen it from the live from the terrace to replays on screen to the PRTV I saw him hitting shoulder first .. only Tempest saw it as direct to head!! Except the TMO of course who just went along with it!
Even my brother who s not a Tigers fan rang me and said why aren’t Tigers appealing that red card decision?!
With these decisions it's always best to reverse the shirt colours in the mind & reassess..
The one that got me this season was at Bristol VanWyk an obvious Red, but he gets a clattering to the head just after...ignored both on pitch & after.
The Ashton one, "Sir" had actually noticed the high tackle to start with (for a change), whether that makes a difference to what happens after?
Barnes & Pearce have made a couple of howlers the other way this season, Sir Wayne is only the best "Sir" still by the inadequacy of others....how Joy Neville is going to the RWC is beyond me...Good luck to the teams that get Brace & her as a combo...
