Six Nations 2012

[Aperitif]

You had a good day then.

Yes, thank you. Eddie Butler thinks surprises are in store for France...here. Still thinking about the jaw-dropping moment when Lawes got robbed, particularly as he was a noticeable 'impact' substitution. I'll try and watch the game on a screen sometime, to see a different point of view. Ashton didn't seem to be as involved...that may just be me looking elsewhere, or generally not paying attention as usual.

 

[subaqua]

the referee wasn't sure he could award. he asked the question try or no try. the video ref came back as inconclusive so none was awarded whats the issue. its not as if refs have never made any mistakes. there was an incident at the begining of the world cup where a kick definitley went through the posts that could have changed the outcome of a game.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I think the point is that the technology was not used effectively. There WAS a camera angle available to the TMO which would have conclusively shown the outcome of Strettle's attempted grounding. Rather than use it the TMO repeatedly review a clip from another angle. Bit daft really given the point of a TMO.

Strettle was rightly aggrieved that young Mr North was not penalised for deliberately swatting the ball into touch earlier in the half. The Welsh YC was well into penalty try territory. It was a long, long way from Steve Walsh's, or indeed the team of four's, best day at the office, and players at elite level are entitled to better outcomes from the professional officials than they are getting this 6 nations. But that is the nature of showbiz rugby. Whilst normal officials ref to the mantra of "Safety, Equity and The Laws" at that level it appears that "Spectacle, Safefy, Equity and The Laws" holds sway.

Why does it matter? Because on the rugby pitches of the UK players in the community game will emulate what they've seen on TV, get penalised for it, and come to the conclusion that their ref hasn't got a clue and is making it up as s/he goes along and the relationship between players and referees gets eroded a little more. Keep that up and we will end up like soccer.

 

[swee'pea99]

While we're moaning about the officials, is it just me or do things seem to have got notably slacker (or at least more inconsistent) since my youth on some basics, like 'not straight' (bad enough at lineouts, but pretty much every scrum is a joke), obstruction/tackle-no-ball/barging non-combatants into touch, and - worst of all - high tackles, which until the so much sexier-sounding spear tackle was discovered used to be regarded with an intolerance on a par with studs-up slide-in tackles in football, but now, unless they're really bad, seldom merit so much a wagged finger.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

well you see the powers that be introduced this wonderful concept called 'materiality' into how they have directed the game is to be refereed. The better class of referee, far above my ex-pay grade, sees an offence and then exercises judgement to decide 'was it material?' aka did it make a difference to the play. Thus we can notice an offisde right wing when the ball is kicked through on the left but discount them as not material.

Let's consider this at the static set pieces...

Put in at the scrums; most elite scrums are not contested, the hooker without the put in does not strike, the pack does not attempt to drive the putting in side off the ball, thus the scrum is 'just a restart' as SH officials say, and the crooked feed is not material.

Then we start to see that creeping into line out throwing. Doesn't have to go down the middle anymore but right at your man. The oppo aren;t always competing in the air so it isn't material.

Then the more dynamic aspects of the game....

The ruck, that isn't really a ruck at elite level, but a pile of bodies on the floor. Well the opposition aren't really competing so the fact is the players off their feet are not material... so then we can allow said players off their feet to facilitate the ball back to the scrum-half and their hands in ruck, even after ref has called no hands, are not material.

Then you apply materiality to open play, an intense, and dynamic environment, and by extension of the principle of subjective 'did it make enough of a difference' the elite ref allows all manner of things to slide just as you have listed. Yet nowhere in the Laws of the Game is materiality even mentioned, let alone defined!

The average fan, even the well-versed fan, sees blocks, and late hits, and illegal barges, and players tackled off and without the ball, sees all manner of calumny on the park short of attempted murder. And sees it all go unpunished. And said fan is baffled. Completely. But should said fan query this he will be told "No one pays to hear the referee blow his whistle, they want to see a game of rugby and you clearly don't understand materiality".

A ref down in the weeds, where refs are not encouraged to apply much in the way of materiality but to 'ref what you see in front of you', will have 30 baffled players every Saturday when he pings the crooked feed, etc., etc..

 

[Aperitif]

Not straight at the lineout is normally policed properly. The fact that the sanction is a fed scrum is just one of life's ironies.

All the scrums look pretty well-fed to me...yum yum that Maximuscle.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Not straight at the lineout is normally policed properly. The fact that the sanction is a fed scrum is just one of life's ironies.

As an ex line out jumper/liftee myself I can assure you, at elite level and below it isn't. It is reffed in the most grossly inconsistent way according to materiality..... tbh most refs, being ex-three-quarters or scrum-halves, haven't got a clue what is going on at line out or scrum time and just want it over and done with asap to defuse the potential flash point and 'so we can get on with the game'

 

[GrumpyGregry]

All the scrums look pretty well-fed to me...yum yum that Maximuscle.

didn't work for scotland though did it? All very well having boyman-mountain pack built like a modern welsh three quarter line but if the gym-bunnies can't actually scrummage against lighter opposition.....

 

[Aperitif]

didn't work for scotland though did it? All very well having boyman-mountain pack built like a modern welsh three quarter line but if the gym-bunnies can't actually scrummage against lighter opposition.....

You're such a bleedin' misery Greg, you'll make a good ref when St Peters XV play Hades Old Scouts...

 

[endoman]

didn't work for scotland though did it? All very well having boyman-mountain pack built like a modern welsh three quarter line but if the gym-bunnies can't actually scrummage against lighter opposition.....

why would that matter in an uncontested scrum?

 

[LarryDuff]

I think the point is that the technology was not used effectively. There WAS a camera angle available to the TMO which would have conclusively shown the outcome of Strettle's attempted grounding. Rather than use it the TMO repeatedly review a clip from another angle. Bit daft really given the point of a TMO.

Strettle was rightly aggrieved that young Mr North was not penalised for deliberately swatting the ball into touch earlier in the half. The Welsh YC was well into penalty try territory. It was a long, long way from Steve Walsh's, or indeed the team of four's, best day at the office, and players at elite level are entitled to better outcomes from the professional officials than they are getting this 6 nations. But that is the nature of showbiz rugby. Whilst normal officials ref to the mantra of "Safety, Equity and The Laws" at that level it appears that "Spectacle, Safefy, Equity and The Laws" holds sway.

Why does it matter? Because on the rugby pitches of the UK players in the community game will emulate what they've seen on TV, get penalised for it, and come to the conclusion that their ref hasn't got a clue and is making it up as s/he goes along and the relationship between players and referees gets eroded a little more. Keep that up and we will end up like soccer.

How do you know there was a camera angle that would have conclusively shown it was a try? Are you saying he deliberately ignored it in order to let Wales win?

You do know that what we see on the TV screens is decided by the BBC producer but the TMO is looking at different pictures, ones that he requests directly from the TV engineers. So just because we saw the same view again and again doesn't mean that's what the TMO was viewing.

You couldn't see the ball touching the ground on or over the line so a try could not be awarded.

The question you should be asking is how Strettle managed to majke a balls of a cast iron try opportunity?

 

[subaqua]

Googlefight has it as a No try http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=try&word2=No+try

 

[martint235]

How do you know there was a camera angle that would have conclusively shown it was a try? Are you saying he deliberately ignored it in order to let Wales win?

You do know that what we see on the TV screens is decided by the BBC producer but the TMO is looking at different pictures, ones that he requests directly from the TV engineers. So just because we saw the same view again and again doesn't mean that's what the TMO was viewing.

You couldn't see the ball touching the ground on or over the line so a try could not be awarded.

The question you should be asking is how Strettle managed to majke a balls of a cast iron try opportunity?

Really? In Super League, albeit a different sport, what you see on TV is exactly what the TMO is looking at, I'd always assumed Union was the same but happy to be wrong.

Oh and I agree with Greg about lineouts. As an ex-lock I was watching the lineouts on Saturday and they weren't even pretending to throw the ball down the middle.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

How do you know there was a camera angle that would have conclusively shown it was a try?

Because I, like millions of others and at least a couple of hundred Rugby referees who are debating the point of the TMO's choice in another forum, have the benefir of sky+. NB at no point iirc have I said it was a try.

Are you saying he deliberately ignored it in order to let Wales win?

No I'm saying the TMO made a mistake in reviewing the wrong clip over and over again.

You do know that what we see on the TV screens is decided by the BBC producer but the TMO is looking at different pictures, ones that he requests directly from the TV engineers. So just because we saw the same view again and again doesn't mean that's what the TMO was viewing.

You do know that you are completely and utterly wrong about this. Pure myth.

The TMO sits in the TV control van by the production engineers. He has no 'private' feed other than that broadcast. What we see is what he has selected and what he is looking at. Over and over. And he is under considerable pressure of time. Unlike us in our living rooms. Unless you are telling me that, and sorry to name drop, Wayne Barnes and Nigel Owens, amongst others, with whom I've discussed the matter with on several occassions, are liars? One elite level ref has even related in writing the tale of not being able to see his TMO TV screen on one occasion because of reflections on it. A precise science it isn't.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You're such a bleedin' misery Greg, you'll make a good ref when St Peters XV play Hades Old Scouts...

so long as they call me 'Sir', and agree to run all penalties like gentlemen, I'll take the gig!