How about a centralised TMO body to oversee all referrals from a specific tournament asks Tank Lanning? That way, rugby could bring in much needed objectivity.
Yet again the match officials come in for huge stick … Boy do these guys have the ability to infuriate, but my oath do they have a tough job to do!
Scrum penalties are my pet hate … Game changing penalties based on guesswork! Roll away tackler!
And if the TMO and referee are struggling to agree, just imagine the vitriol going down on Twitter!
What about simplifying the clearly overly complex set of rules, with a view to removing all referee subjectivity, instead implementing purely objective decisions based on the black and white of the rule book?
One of the biggest issues in the game is the subjectivity asked of the officials, as it leads to laws being interpreted differently in every game.
Simplification, thankfully, is seemingly on it’s way, and should also lead to more objectivity, but I do not see rugby ever losing all subjectivity – unless we are prepared to keep penalty milking in the game.
Deciding which prop is dropping the scrum, presuming it’s not plain old physics, would make for a column of it’s own, so perhaps let’s stick to the dropping and jumping into a tackle.
Simplification of the rules might add “Unless it’s done intentionally”, but then who decides on the intent?
Obviously one wants to protect a player jumping into the air to take a high ball, but how much protection does a player jumping into the air with ball in hand as he is about to get tackled deserve?
Again, who decides on the intent?
How about a centralised TMO body to oversee all referrals from a specific tournament? That way, at least it’s the same people overseeing all the decisions, and by having more than one person (the referee would be removed from all TMO calls), we bring in more objectivity.
One way or another though, for as long as we keep intent in the laws – and surely we must – there is always going to be some form of subjectivity in rugby officiating.
