Refereeing decisions

[The Red Baron]

What I noticed over the weekend (did not watch all games, so no TOTW effort from me!) is the disparity from ref to ref with respect to time for a tackled player to release the ball, and the variance in tacklers releasing players before latching.
Obviously players have to play the ref but it's hard from match to match to get this right with such a spread in officiating. It really does change the vibe and tempo of a game.

Spot on Cyclo. This is something that does my head in as a spectator, it must be bloody hard on the players having to constantly adapt to this.

I get that it's hard to gauge, as there's so many factors that influence when a player must release the tackled player, etc, but there seems to be no consistency in the interpretation of the laws that govern the tackle either.

 

[D-Box]

Is the red card upgrade process working?

In terms of the flow of the game - yep much better than a 15 minute huddle consisting of the Ref, AR, TMO, ref's water boy. However, a quick look at the judiciary outcomes would suggest that potentially the TMOs may be coming in a bit harsh. Not surprising considering that they are often the ones to flag it in the first place. We also often see the TMO being talked down by on field following the 15 min huddle. All three games have had a different TMO

McKee - MP (Moana Pasifika) v Force - upgrade and then judiciary warning
Amone - Force v MP (Moana Pasifika) - upgrade and then judiciary warning
Callan - Force v Reds - upgrade and then judiciary warning
Mafileo - Hurricanes v Rebels - upgrade then 3 weeks

 

[Braveheart81]

Hopefully there is dialogue between the judiciary and the TMOs/referees to give feedback on these.

I think the Callan one was a poor decision but generally these haven't been crazy. The 20 minute red card certainly lessens the impact.

 

[LeCheese]

Hopefully there is dialogue between the judiciary and the TMOs/referees to give feedback on these.

I think the Callan one was a poor decision but generally these haven't been crazy. The 20 minute red card certainly lessens the impact.

Agreed. I also hope that the AR4 or another individual could be used as a second pair of eyes, so the TMO has someone to assist with the upgrade decision.

 

[SteveWA]

i think they are heading (!) in the right direction and the disconnect between the match day officials and the review panel is just a teething problem. That being said the inconsistencies (within and between matches) is a real problem if it continues

 

[Braveheart81]

Agreed. I also hope that the AR4 or another individual could be used as a second pair of eyes, so the TMO has someone to assist with the upgrade decision.

A duty judicial officer on hand for each game would be a good move forward to provide an opinion. They don't need to be at the game, just available to look at replays when a yellow card that could be a red card has been handed out.

 

[Wilson]

Yeah, it's definitely an improvement for the actual games and we weren't immune from mistakes under the previous system.

I would like to see the decisions around whether or not a card was upgraded published within a day or two of the games though. There is a bit of a loss of context right now in not seeing the process with all the angles.

 

[LeCheese]

Yeah, it's definitely an improvement for the actual games and we weren't immune from mistakes under the previous system.

I would like to see the decisions around whether or not a card was upgraded published within a day or two of the games though. There is a bit of a loss of context right now in not seeing the process with all the angles.

I'd like to see it more integrated into the broadcast. Display a little popup once the decision has been made, with a very brief description of the reasoning.

Similar to the graphics announcing time penalties on the F1 broadcast.

 

[D-Box]

A duty judicial officer on hand for each game would be a good move forward to provide an opinion. They don't need to be at the game, just available to look at replays when a yellow card that could be a red card has been handed out.

It could almost be like our bunker. Couldn't be too hard to have a single consistent person on call with a laptop and good internet for 12 hours a weekend

 

[Braveheart81]

It could almost be like our bunker. Couldn't be too hard to have a single consistent person on call with a laptop and good internet for 12 hours a weekend

I don't know that it's reasonable for it to be one person. Presumably you'd be looking for it to be people already involved in the judicial process and not just a part time job for a random referee etc.

The single person only makes it a better process if their accuracy of what they deem a red card matches what the judiciary sees as a red card offence. Doesn't help if they're consistently wrong and/or in disagreement with the judiciary.

 

[molman]

Have referees just given up on the aspect of players clearing out well beyond the ruck? I'm seeing time and time again players clearing out well beyond the ruck, often opening up holes. The NZ teams are particularly guilty of it, almost tactically so, though it's appearing in most games.

In the Rebels vs Chiefs game at ~41:35ish minute, the Chief's 3 takes the Rebels 6 out well beyond the ruck. He actual steps around the ruck, grabs him really high and tries to flip him/pull backwards such that the Rebels player is ~5-10m's away from the original ruck. It creates a gaping hole in the line which is then obviously exploited.

 

[dru]

Are they not calling skewed line out throws when there is no opposition jumper? I thought that interpretation had been dropped.

 

[Dan54]

Are they not calling skewed line out throws when there is no opposition jumper? I thought that interpretation had been dropped.

I thought it had too dru, was a ridiculous interpretation anyway, anyone who has played as lineout jumper knows you don't jump if there is no way to win ball, just taking yourself out of game.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Are they not calling skewed line out throws when there is no opposition jumper? I thought that interpretation had been dropped.

AFAIK it was never introduced into Super Rugby competition. Was in the NRC and some trials I think.

 

[molman]

Are they not calling skewed line out throws when there is no opposition jumper? I thought that interpretation had been dropped.

Doesn't seem so does it.

I don't know for a fact, but the way games are being refereed in SuperRugby at the moment, there seems to be a real focus on removing anything that will stop the game, including things where penalties really should be given. I understand the drive and commercial imperative to make a engaging product for viewers and having the referee becoming the center of the game is far from what most people want.

I would be curious to hear someone interview the referee teams to hear how they are approaching things. I'm not actually sure of the current SANZAR structure as to, is someone overseeing all the referees or is it the home nations?

Personally I'm struggling with it a little as there are things that I can't believe they aren't seeing and I do feel like there is too much reward for poor play at times. Individually you can write it off as one of those things, but collectively it's impacting games.

 

[elementfreak]

Agreed. I also hope that the AR4 or another individual could be used as a second pair of eyes, so the TMO has someone to assist with the upgrade decision.

The TMO has an assistant in the box with them, but they just run the screens and get the angles that the TMO wants to see, ultimately the decision lies with the TMO and the TMO only.

 

[LeCheese]

The TMO has an assistant in the box with them, but they just run the screens and get the angles that the TMO wants to see, ultimately the decision lies with the TMO and the TMO only.

Yep, and that's my point - that shouldn't be the case

 

[elementfreak]

Yep, and that's my point - that shouldn't be the case

I disagree, otherwise why stop at 2? Why not get all 5 Australian TMOs in the box each game? Ultimately they only have 8 minutes of game time to reach a decision, not much time to continue with the role, watch replays, come to a decision, and then debate if it’s a RC or not.

 

[LeCheese]

I disagree, otherwise why stop at 2? Why not get all 5 Australian TMOs in the box each game? Ultimately they only have 8 minutes of game time to reach a decision, not much time to continue with the role, watch replays, come to a decision, and then debate if it’s a RC or not.

An extra set of eyes significantly reduces the likelihood of howlers - hence why the old process always involved ref, on-field ARs, and TMO - after a second set of eyes, there's diminishing returns.

If structured appropriately with clear-cut decision making frameworks and procedures, time-to-decision won't be any different. If anything, it lessens the burden of having to juggle live play and the new procedure.

 

[HayFarmer]

Question about the Reds v Saders game were Murphy awarded a try by Saders half, Heinz. The ball was still in the ruck, he picked it up still inside the ruck confines & moved the ball a few inches onto the line.
Isn't this hands in the ruck? Sure halves are allowed to dig balls out of rucks with their hands but this is different in that he played at the ball within a ruck.