All Blacks v Springboks - Eden Park, Sept 14th 2013

[cyclopath]

In both of bdp's yellows, ayoub really let Poite down IMO. Not defending Poite but a shred of pro active comment in the first situation from the TMO, should have got a proper decision. Either a penalty for offside or not. Think you could probably say the same about the poor communication between the officials in the second instance too.

The TMO is bound to answer the question asked by the referee. It's not an opportunity to expound on whatever they like.
Poite specifically asked Ayoub about the foul play AFTER the tackle, and made it clear he had decided on the YC already. It's not the TMO's place to start telling the ref what else he was wrong about.
the second YC seemed fair enough - leading with your elbow as a fending technique is clumsy and dangerous, and shouldn't be encouraged. The communication was fine - he asked Ayoub, and got an answer.
Without Poite's error on the first, the RC fiasco doesn't occur.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

And what's more I reckon ayoub expressed his answer so that he was distancing himself from it

 

[The Incredible Plan]

I have deleted the game so can't review the footage - was there specific piece of foul play from BDP or was it just the general melee that developed?

 

[Hawko]

I agree with you 100% Dan. But when the decision had to be made regarding the second yellow, I think the ref should have just awarded the penalty knowing the implications of the second yellow. What made this ref especially arrogant in my view was he was clearly hold by the TMO regarding the Carter tackle that he could not see any foul play. The he says go with what you're thinking which was stupid on the TMO's part.

Poite was pretty clear in his referral. He was sure the tackle was illegal and asked the TMO to report on any foul play in the ensuing melee. The TMO (George Ayoub, very experienced) reported no act of foul play in the melee and suggested he should therefore go with his previous ruling. It would have been grossly improper for Ayoub to comment on the legality of the tackle unless he was asked. (Several TMO's have done this in the past and have endured a firestorm of criticism for it.)

It was Poite's fault that the tackle was not reviewed. This was the crucial error in my view. Ref's can make mistakes in a tackle like this which was big man on little man and resulted in injury to the tackled player. Sometimes the angle that a ref is standing can distort the view of it. Poite should have asked the TMO to review both the tackle and the melee.

And what does it say about the NZ team's response to a genuinely fair tackle that their whole pack should immediately run in and start pushing and shoving. They all made the same error as Poite. The correct ruling should have been a review of the tackle, exhoneration of BdP and a team warning to NZ to leave the reffing to the ref and not to run in to start a melee.

 

[The Incredible Plan]

Having been set right by cyclopath and hawko, i wonder do the refs get better ratings for being more specific in this regard rather than very general in asking the TMO's opinion? If not, seems little downside in asking for a wider review of such incidents. Maybe that's another topic in itself.

 

[cyclopath]

Having been set right by cyclopath and hawko, i wonder do the refs get better ratings for being more specific in this regard rather than very general in asking the TMO's opinion? If not, seems little downside in asking for a wider review of such incidents. Maybe that's another topic in itself.

I don't know, but I think the TMO should be asked specific questions, otherwise it become unmanageable. If the ref feels a try has been scored, then "Any reason I cannot award try?", or if they feel it is uncertain or unlikely "Can you see a grounding?" for example. Or "Was there obstruction / forward pass / foot in touch etc leading to the try?". Foul play should be specific, and Poite was specific, but erred in not asking the tackle to be checked too, which looked the worst thing rather than the general handbags that ensued!!
As Hawko said, TMOs going off on a tangent have rightly been censured.

 

[Rob42]

Use of the TMO is also hampered by the difficulty of communicating by earpiece in a very loud stadium. Often, TV viewers can hear the TMO's words better than the ref. Thus, the conversation has to be kept very simple. Perhaps they should go to the NFL system of having the on-field ref review the play using a screen on the side of the field, avoiding the need for discussion. Steve Walsh loves the big screen method, but that's variable in its quality.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Thus, the conversation has to be kept very simple.

and not in french, unless with subtitles, as the conversation between Poite and the AR was last night - or was that a dream?

 

[boyo]

Jamais.

 

[FrankLind]

And what does it say about the NZ team's response to a genuinely fair tackle that their whole pack should immediately run in and start pushing and shoving. They all made the same error as Poite. The correct ruling should have been a review of the tackle, exhoneration of BdP and a team warning to NZ to leave the reffing to the ref and not to run in to start a melee.

They rushed in because there was a scrap developing between Willem Alberts and someone because Alberts cleaned someone out in a way they took exception to (maybe he used his kneees as he flew over the top - I don't know). It was nothing to do with Carter being hurt. Nice try though.

At 1:40

 

[Dan54]

I was gutted for the Saffers yesterday. They were absolutely dudded by the ref and it killed the game as a contest in the second half. That first yellow for BdP wasn't even a penalty, let alone a card. A perfectly legal tackle: it was around the chest/shoulders and he used his arms..
quote]

 

[Dan54]

Interesting to see first point of contact above, I actually wondered if Poite thought he was above shoulder!!
Still thought it harsh call, but just thought I might show that pic as I've seen another one posted about 1-2 seconds later.

 

[crangs81]

Having watched it again I'm gonna have to say Justice for Keiran Read. That YC was weaker than BdP's first one


Conrad deserved an early shower though

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Dan54 its just the inertia that snaps Carter's head in the driection of BdeP - if you look FrankLind at about 5 min from the reverse angle there's no issue.
Poite does say its high and no arms so youre right about what he thought

 

[Dan54]

Yep IS, like I said thought it harsh, just wanted a chance to post a picture

 

[Sully]

Those who know me know that I'm reluctant to criticise referees. This is not one of those times. To refer a tackle to the video ref and then ignore the decision and the video replay on the big screen is unforgivable. I missed the Kieran Read card but I now believe Poites name must be remove from the test match referees board and never be reinstated. Ever

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 4

 

[Muttonbird]

Wow, that's a poor post. I can find almost nothing in there that is true. Bismarck has no need to play a 'role'. What you see is what you get.

Well, he did lose the game for the Boks. That much is true because he got himself sent off for dangerous play.

I honestly believe he is out to maim opposition players, that's why I suggested he's the new SA hard-man. He attacked Messam's head/neck with his elbow. Clearly illegal and a straight red on it's own as far as I'm concerned. He lead with the shoulder high up in the Carter tackle but decided to throw in some arms as an afterthought. Also drove Carter into the ground with the intention of causing as much damage as possible.

Is this what rugby is about?

 

[Slim 293]

Is this what rugby is about?

I would like to think that the good, perfectly legal tackle Bismarck put on Carter is part of what rugby is about...........

 

[Slim 293]

I'm not sure if it's already posted, but stolen from another forum:

 

[Muttonbird]

Ah well, it's fish 'n' chip paper now. With the run from offside and the shoulder lead, I'm convinced there was the intent to injure and that's not rugby to me.

Has he been cited?