Hurricanes v Sunwolves
-
Tiddlywinks
-
joke
-
At this rate I'm moving towards getting the TMO out of it all together and teams having to deal with shitty calls.
I do wonder what the behind the scenes chat is around how much the infield referees have to deal with the TMO's. I've heard both Barnes & Owens tell the TMO they disagree and are just going to play on, but I can't understand why Nutbrown hasn't said the same thing here for both of those. Tackle on Barrett was fine, and Savea's cleanout was as well. Surely Nutbrown could see that???
-
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
-
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
Not if it has nothing to do with the try. Parker's tackle on Beauden was heaps of phases after.
-
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
Not if it has nothing to do with the try. Parker's tackle on Beauden was heaps of phases after.
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
Not if it has nothing to do with the try. Parker's tackle on Beauden was heaps of phases after.
And if it had been called at the time, it still would have been a try?
-
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
Not if it has nothing to do with the try. Parker's tackle on Beauden was heaps of phases after.
And if it had been called at the time, it still would have been a try?
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@bones said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
@hydro11 said in Hurricanes v Sunwolves:
If it is a yellow card, go back for it. However, if it is just a penalty, I dont see the point in going back to it. It isn't serious enough to rule out a try.
I can't say I agree with that. These calls were stupid, but if you've fouled in the lead up to a try, there's no reason why it shouldn't be called back (e.g. when the touch judge sticks his/her flag out).
Not if it has nothing to do with the try. Parker's tackle on Beauden was heaps of phases after.
And if it had been called at the time, it still would have been a try?
Obviously not. I believe the referee has a job to do and it is only up to the TMO to fix up serious mistakes, "howlers" if you will. Otherwise we should have referees going back to look at whether technically player x came in from the side three phases a go.
-
It comes down to what is defined as the TMO role. I think we all agree with
- Try scoring
- Clear and obvious foul play
- Specific requests from the onfield referee
But what has been brought back in this game is
- Forward passes way back prior
- 50/50 (at best) penalty calls
I don't think that should be in their mandate. It's only one step away from offsides at the ruck / breakdown of which I'm fairly sure you could ping people at every single opportunity.
