TMO? TM No thanks!

So a new season and yet more new rule changes.  Plus ca change plus c’est la meme chose.  But let’s not get bogged down in the depressing tinkering of the IRB laws committee too much.  Instead let’s focus on one specific change that is only a trial and is only in the Aviva Premiership (so we are spared it in the LV= Cup and the Heineken Cup).  The Television Match Official (TMO) has become a feature in Rugby since its introduction in 2001; this season sees its scope widened significantly with all incidents back to the previous time the ball was dead reviewable.  RM sees the logic in that, if the TMO can help stop a match being turned by a blatant block (such as the Leinster v Toulouse semi final in 2011, or the Worcester v Bedford Championship semi final of the same year), or a clear and obvious knock on then that is pretty much a good thing.  Certainly if you are on the end of a previously missed call.

RM has two problems with it.

First, the scope is too wide and not clearly thought through.  Forward passes and whether a kick has gone through the posts cannot always be determined on a 2 dimensional television screen.  Perspective is key and different camera angles can, will and do show different things.  Unless a camera is directly over head with a line marked on the field a pass cannot be 100% certain to have gone forward, presuming that only close decisions will be referred, most cameras will be at a slight angle and this will distort the picture.  For kicks the situation is even worse.  There is no way that a camera can show whether a kick, which has gone above the posts, has also gone through them.  No way.  It is impossible because there is no perspective, we don’t know where the ball is with regard to the ground and the posts.  The touch judges are the best people, much better than the camera, to determine that.

Second is the implementation of the trial.  It is only being used in Televised matches which means that half the matches on any given weekend, and 4 out of 6 on the final weekend, will not be under the same scrutiny and the same rules as the others.  Half the fixtures will have 3 officials watching and judging them whilst the other half will have those three plus a roving 4^th official who can intervene on foul play at any time, as well as use slow motion to decide exactly what happened.  A try on TV will be subject to vastly different scrutiny to a non-televised match despite the non-televised one being of potentially greater importance.  The rational for this is cost, apparently £1m per season which sounds a lot but is only £80k per club, I find that insulting and rather short sighted.  The cost is not great and to imply it is is taking us for fools, it fundamentally undermines the fairness and the equality of the competition plus once we have the extra cameras at the matches for the TMO we can also broadcast these games to foreign TV markets, red button for domestic markets, or simply for better quality highlights and internet streaming.  This probably would not cover the £1m out lay but would go some way to reducing the net cost.

The TMO in Rugby has the basic problem of allowing the referee to back out of making decisions for himself; this is not new for this season though it is still a problem.  The other major sports which have brought in review systems, the NFL, cricket, Tennis, etc. all have it so that the official still must make a decision.  That decision can then be challenged and if it is irrefutably wrong changed.  In rugby we refer judgement calls such as forward passes which the referee was in a perfectly good position to call.  Tom Varndell’s try at Twickenham this weekend was a case in point, the review showed some evidence that the pass was forward, but nothing that irrefutably showed the pass to be forward rather than flat.  Especially when we consider that this was early in the move and there were several passes and a ruck after the offence.  Wayne Barnes showed the weakness is allowing referees to “just check”, who can really blame a referee for using all the tools he is given?  RM can’t.  This is a symptom of a sick system, Barnes is a good ref who should be backed to make his own decisions. 

A challenge system would be better than the current one, but RM doesn’t believe it would be the best.  If the 4^th official could call for a specific instance to be reviewed by the TMO then the 3 on field officials would have to call the game as they see it, whilst we would still have the Television review option and wouldn’t have to have the unedifying sight of a captain having to formally question the referee.  The 4^th official could have until the conversion is struck to call on the TMO and the TMO could then have 2 minutes, or 90 seconds better still, to make his decision.  He could only over turn the referee if there was clear and irrefutable evidence that a call was wrong.