[6N] Tmo farce

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#2
Well, I would have given a try.
I was at the game and couldn't hear the TMO . What was the reasoning given?
 

pedr

Rugby Club Member
#3
TMO said no clear and obvious grounding by Red so first grounding by White. And then the TMO said “so scrum 5”, if I recall it correctly - when that’s also wrong, surely?
 

Christy

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/ireland.p
#5
Wales , clearly got hand to ball 1st & scored try ,,i even think the lines man george clancy was surprised by tmo decision ..its a hugh shame as nobody wants to take any thing away from england ,,both teams deserve better officiating ..
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#6
The exact words of the TMO - Glenn Newman from New Zealand - are quite astonishing. Despite clear video evidence to the contrary, he confidently tells Garces that the first grounding was from an English player, Watson.

The ball has come off the knee of the Welsh player, but has not been clearly grounded. The first grounding is by England.
Source
Shrug. Did seem like Red got a hand to it first. It does seem like TMOs create more issues than they solve.
 
Last edited:

peperami

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#7
Ok, I'm going to offer the contradictory opinion. I believe that the welsh player got to the ball first but that the ball was not on the ground at that time, its then gone forward off his hand. Grounded by Watson. The correct decision is a scrum 5 England ball due to the Welsh knock on. However if as it seems he just thinks England got there first it should have been a 22 England as Wales put the ball in goal.
 

timmad

Rugby Club Member
#8
Kick: An act made by intentionally hitting the ball with any part of the leg or foot, except the heel, from the toe to the knee but not including the knee

As the ball went into the in goal from the knee of the Welsh winger wasn't that a knock on in the first place - scrum England - and made the grounding irrelevant?
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#11
Look up the Laws timmad !
Play on, it's only a knock on if comes off hands or arm . It's perfectly legal to chest it forward
 

colesy

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#12
Maybe the TMO was thinking about law 22.15 - where there’s doubt about the grounding, 5m scrum attack.
 

pedr

Rugby Club Member
#14
Is “ground” (the verb) defined in the 2018 Laws? I couldn’t find it with a quick look. I think it’s feasible to say that some people watching the footage would doubt whether there was downward pressure, or whether the ball was in the process of bouncing up and towards the dead ball line at the point when the Welsh hand touched it.

I don’t agree with that, but since it was the first TMO question, I can understand the doubt if that was the TMO’s thought process.
 

Taff

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/wales.png
#15
Ok, I'm going to offer the contradictory opinion. I believe that the welsh player got to the ball first but that the ball was not on the ground at that time, its then gone forward off his hand. Grounded by Watson. The correct decision is a scrum 5 England ball due to the Welsh knock on.
For what it's worth, I agree.

TMO said no clear and obvious grounding by Red so first grounding by White. And then the TMO said “so scrum 5”, if I recall it correctly - when that’s also wrong, surely?
Unless the TMO thought the Welsh player had knocked on the ball.
 
Last edited:

Balones

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#16
I can agree that the ball was going forward when the ball was being ‘grounded’ but that doesn’t constitute a knock-on does it? The hand was in contact all the time.
 

Marc Wakeham

Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required
#17
I've just watched it for the first time. I accept this is with a "Welsh eye" but that was a try. Quite worrying is how quickly the call was made.

If we are to have a TMO they need to get it right.
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#18
I agree, with that point. Given how much debate the decision has sparked, it cannot be said to have been clear and obvious who first grounded the ball.
DOUBT ABOUT GROUNDING

If there is doubt about which team first grounded the ball in in-goal, play is restarts with a five-metre scrum, in line with the place where the ball was grounded. The attacking team throws in.
Scrum to the attacking team would definitely have been a fairer decision than saying that White got a hand to it first. Perhaps somebody had given the Kiwi a loan of some rose tinted glasses, which might have affected his ability to see there was at least some doubt over who first got a hand to the ball.
The ball has come off the knee of the Welsh player, but has not been clearly grounded. The first grounding is by England.
In his own words, both players have gotten a hand to the ball, but it is not clear if Red grounded it first. Sounds like Law 21.20 pretty much.


Else where in the media, debate about the Welsh player not being in control of the ball, or not exerting enough (WTf?) downwards pressure on the ball is bollox. Those people are basically accepting he did get a hand to it before White, but still calling it a try to England. sad!
 
Last edited:

peperami

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#19
For clarity on my post, I am not claiming its knocked on into in goal by the welsh player, but that the diving welsh player did not have contact with the ball whilst the ball was in contact with the ground and that it travelled forward off his hand onto the ground.

However as several people have said it was far too quickly discharged by the TMO, and it looked like Garces didnt look at the footage himself and own the decision.

Great test rugby though.
 

menace

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#20
I can agree that the ball was going forward when the ball was being ‘grounded’ but that doesn’t constitute a knock-on does it? The hand was in contact all the time.

For my 2 bob...supporting neither team, I think red hands stays in contact with the ball all the way to grounding and think there is enough evidence that red should have been awarded a try.

(Thats disregarding how the ball got into in goal as the footage I saw didnt really clearly show if it was off knees or hands into ingoal. Though must admit as first show at full speed I thought the red winger was in front of kicker...but on a couple of reviews and feeeze frame it wasnt C and O so happy that he wasnt offside. I presume that was checked?)