Refereeing decisions

[Scoey]

Walsh seems to often just call it as he sees it and resists the use of the TMO where possible. Or at least it appears that way to me. I really like that and there should be more of it.
Just get on with the game and if there's crap that happens off the ball that is missed well cite the players after and nail them then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sully]

Walsh actually stayed where the wrestling was and didn't follow play. So he did get a good view of it.
What is the recognised procedure for refs in this situation? Should they follow the play or stay with the skirmish? Is there an official policy?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[Scoey]

I noticed that too. He was alternating between watching the fracas and the play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scrubber2050]

IMO - a bloke who gets gouged normally is fucking filthy, finger pointing to the wound/eyes, making accusations to the Ref. Higgers didn't do that. Maybe the Refereee should actually ask the "victim" IF he was gouged and that together with the TMO and his own opinion should be taken into account when deciding the penalty. I think very very few players would make an allegation of eye gouging if it didn't actually happen.

However, it looked bad on TV - if he did the crime then severe penalty to be imposed. If he didn't then it was a disgraceful call by the TMO

 

[Dan54]

I honestly don't really think it was a gouge, still not a disgraceful call or anything by TMO, you can't give facials like that, because if it allowed the next step will be"I was only giving a facial and accidently poked him eye" will come out, you have to keep hands clear of face!!

 

[Lindommer]

A player should NEVER allow his fingers to make contact with an opponent's eyes, unless accidently. FWIW, Scrubber, I also don't think EOD gouged Higger's eyes as there was no raking movement, but the photos clearly show contact between fingers and eyes. EOD's going to go for a row here.

 

[Baldric]

The procedure is for the ref to follow play and the Ass Refs to handle the behind the play stuff. If Walsh was monitoring the wrestling he should have blown his whistle to stop play.

IMO - a bloke who gets gouged normally is fucking filthy, finger pointing to the wound/eyes, making accusations to the Ref.

Stan, I agree with you on that. He did not seem at all worried about it, but O'D is going to have a hard time explaining the footage to the judiciary.

 

[Braveheart81]

These sort of photos are going to get you into a lot of trouble.

You could see Higgers closing his eyes tighter when O'Donoghue's fingers were pushing around his eye.

I imagine it will be a low end gouging charge but this is still not going to end well for Ed O'Donoghue. At almost 32 years of age, that could easily be the end of his career. I'll be surprised if he gets a suspension of less than 10 weeks.

 

[Scoey]

@Lindommer how long is a row?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Inside Shoulder]

This thread is for discussing refereeing decisions and their implications. It's not for stupid made up names for player and officials or mind reading player intentions. You are allowed plenty of latitude for that in match threads.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Is this directed at my post?

 

[Sully]

Where you making up names for players?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[qwerty51]

In the end Ed's suspension is going to hinge entirely on Higginbotham's testimony I'd imagine.

Here's a reference: http://www.espnscrum.com/premiership-2013-14/rugby/story/225323.html

 

[en_force_er]

I honestly don't really think it was a gouge, still not a disgraceful call or anything by TMO, you can't give facials like that, because if it allowed the next step will be"I was only giving a facial and accidently poked him eye" will come out, you have to keep hands clear of face!!

This is probably the fairest summary of this whole debacle.

If I was a ref I'd probably try to ignore it but once a TMO or captain brings it up it can't go unpunished.

 

[qwerty51]

Also the irony of the situation is that if McMahon wasn't penalised the TMO wouldn't have seen the incident since the replay of the scuffle only came up because McMahon's penalty.

 

[en_force_er]

Also the irony of the situation is that if McMahon wasn't penalised the TMO wouldn't have seen the incident since the replay of the scuffle only came up because McMahon's penalty.

The irony being McMahon was robbed and that would have perhaps been the main topic of discussion had the Reds won.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Is this directed at my post?

No - - but i couldn't see who was: so i'll just slink away in ignorance

 

[Quick Hands]

Walsh actually stayed where the wrestling was and didn't follow play. So he did get a good view of it.
What is the recognised procedure for refs in this situation? Should they follow the play or stay with the skirmish? Is there an official policy?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Blow his whistle, stop the play and restore order I would have thought.

 

[boyo]

@Lindommer how long is a row?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is an ancient unit of measure, largely disused in modern times.

I don't think that it ever has been adequately defined.

It is probably more than 12 weeks but less than 156 weeks.

Hth.

 

[Quick Hands]

In this case the solution would have been for the Ass Ref to say to Walsh, check the video and see what happened.

IIRC Higgers attempted to speak to Walsh after the penalty but was waved away. The whole initial part of the process was quite poorly handled by Walsh. One player is pinned to the ground by an opponent and there's obviously something going on and he didn't stop play until a Rebels player tried to pull EOD off. Therein lies the genesis of the controversy.

 

[terry j]

in any case, I always thought 'third man in' somehow applied to continuing a fight. hardly what that rebels player did.