In the world of the IRB and specifically Paddy O’Brien, protocols supersedes common sense.
The incident in question is the Jimmy Cowan try which was not awarded during Saturday’s Tri-Nations test match in Port Elisabeth based on the fact that the final pass on the try-line from Israel Dagg to Cowan was forward.
The Protocol for TMO’s
When it comes to tries, or possible tries being awarded with the assistance of the TMO, there are clear policies and protocols involved.
Let me copy the these protocols for you straight from the law book before we deal with the incident.
The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to:
Grounding of the ball for try and touch down
Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball.
This includes situations where a player may or may not have stepped in touch in the act of grounding the ball on or over the goal line.
The TMO could therefore be requested to assist the referee in making the following decisions:
Try No try and scrum awarded 5 metres
Touch down by a defender In touch – line-out
Touch-in-goal Ball dead on or over the dead ball line Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal All kicks at goal including dropped goals.
The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball). The TMO must not be asked to assist in any other decision other than those listed. The referee must make an effort to make an adjudication. If he is unsighted or has doubt, he will then use the following process (4).
In plain English this means that the TMO can only judge whether a player, in the act of scoring the try, stepped in touch or touch-and-goal, or knocked the ball on in the process of grounding it or did not ground it legally altogether.
The incident
The incident on Saturday saw Dagg break away where he was tackled inches short of the Springbok goal line, he popped a pass to Cowan who was in support and Cowan dived over the line and seemingly scored the try.
Neither Dagg nor Cowan stepped in touch, and there was nothing wrong with the grounding of the ball.
It was however as clear as daylight that the pass from Dagg to Cowan was at least a meter forward.
Now according to protocol the TMO cannot base his decision (try or no try) on a forward pass prior to grounding or advise the referee of such an incident.
The referee asked the TMO: “Johan, is this a try – yes or no?”
The TMO, after reviewing the evidence replied: “There is no problem with the grounding.”
At this point he should have said; “You may award the try”, because based on evidence he was allowed to adjudicate on this was the only answer he should have given.
However, he continued to say or ask the referee; “Do you require any information before the goal-line?” To which the referee responded; “Yes”.
The TMO said: “It was a forward pass.”
The referee signalled that a try had not been scored and awarded a five-metre scrum to South Africa.
What they said
Afterwards, Graham Henry did not seem to perturbed at the decision.
“If it was a forward pass, it shouldn’t have been a try. If the officials can make good decisions on the evidence they have got, why not? I know it’s outside the laws of the game – they should only adjudicate over the goal line. But I haven’t got a problem with it.”
South African referees boss Andre Watson had a similar view of the incident. “What we want is the right decision. It was clear that the pass was forward and if the try had been allowed we [referees] would have looked a bunch of fools.
“Protocols are important and we should try to stick to them but they are essentially guidelines and I’d rather apologise for what happened than get the wrong answer.”
It is when it comes to the IRB referees boss, New Zealander Paddy O’Brien that the picture changes.
“They were wrong,” O’Brien said of his match officials.
As for why Meuswesen had gone outside of his jurisdiction, to inform Clancy that Dagg’s final pass to Cowan was forward, O’Brien didn’t know. Or why a referee as experienced as Clancy was swayed by advice that wasn’t Meuswesen’s to give.
“I’ve asked for a reply from both of them and I haven’t received one, as yet,” said O’Brien. “They are expected to stick to our protocols and the message will be loud and clear come the World Cup, or come this week’s test matches, that there will be consequences for officials that go outside the protocols. That’s why they’re in place.”
“He’s a very competent TMO, just like George is a very good referee. But they got it wrong and they will be told that they got it wrong.”
To many South African the reaction of O’Brien will come as no surprise. He has been accused of bias towards New Zealand in the past and this will further fuel this perception.
The fact that the TMO and referee went outside the scope of protocols in place should not overshadow that the correct decision was made in the end – this is of course the whole point of a referee, his assistants and TMO’s (to make the right decisions) or is it not?
Another important point to note is one Paul Dobson made on Rugby365: “The protocol is not a part of the Laws of the Game, just a regulation of a process of applying the laws.”
I am absolutely stupefied that O’Brien cannot see this where number 1 the right decision was made, and number 2, even the opposing coach does not have a problem with this.
I hope both George Clancy and TMO Johan Meuswesen ignores O’Brien’s request for an ‘answer’ as to the reasons for their actions, because if he cannot see this, he should not even referee primary school matches.
elcamino
logan
ROOILEEU
Tina
KingPaul
Methos The French Stormer
Thomas_Bulls
Deon
Aldo
garyj1-Bulls
JT_BOKBEFOK!
Amethyst
trevormayhew
Pom in Joburg
Marcel
namboer
Jacques(Bunny)Somtimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
RUGGA_MIND
Quinn25
Pokkel
moose
Vernonimous
Watte
niekie
Dante
Panther
Vetgesmeerde Blits
bryce_in_oz
Kozac
Blokkies
Number12_Lions
Brutus2
Lehe6
Estian Nortier
DavidS
johanleroux13
Morné
Tafelberg
pietstreak
Ollie
Koos
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:42 am
Gawd he becoming the JuJu of the rugby world…..
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:59 am
What an arse. He should be asking why a touch judge – sorry, an assistant referee who was a couple of metres away watching the pass, could not see that it was forward.
Or are the refreees, who are dependent on NO’Brain for a job, too scared to penalise the AB’s? It is going to make for an interesting RWC.
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:29 am
Johan I know you read Ruggaworld so here is a suggested answer
Dear Paddy aka New Zealand rugby’s number ONE fan…
On behalf of Johan, who will not deign to provide your officious self serving pro Kiwi arrogant bald headed brainless gormless gutless ass with an answer here is one from SA Referees
Add
Now take this digit and insert it as deeply as it will fit into your rectum… remove … lick off… continue until you have removed all the crap from your tight lilly ass and have developed at least a semblance of a personality….
God surely even the IRB who appointed this twat must by now see he has JUST New Zealand’s interests at heart at all times…
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:36 am
Reply to mawm- the ever-so-hopeful-shark @ 10:59 am:
Ja the Boks will need a twenty point lead to get a draw against the All Blacks…
BTW you shuld see what an officious ass CowPattie NoBrain is with his referees…
I have had the displeasure of seeing hius Hitlerite hystreria in e-mails…
It’s like the rtantrums Hitler thgrew in his Fuhrerebunker if his soldiers did not follow his orders to the letter even if they were outnumbered, ougunned, outmaneuvered and defeated…
I recall the one where he whinged about the way the scrums were being set in SH before the RWC 2007… you will recall that SANZAR refs had collectively decided that the set would be like this
Crouch
then quickly touchpause….. engage ( a far more sensible set)
Then Cowpattie NoBrain learned of this
It was an e0-mail to “all” that read like
GUYS I AM REALLY PISSED OFF BY THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE RULE IS THERE MUST BE PAUSES BETWEEN EVERY CALL LIKE THIS
CROUCH
TOUCH
PAUSE
ENGAGE
NOW GET IT RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I DON’T WANT TO HAVE TO TALK ABOIUT THIS AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As I said
He is a totasl asswipe…
One of the few refs I’d like to demonstrate my Krav Maga techniques on…
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:42 am
This was a CLASSIC case of how a TMO SHOULD be used…
Graham Henry was fine with it… the NZ commentators had a bit of a moan but then said… “at the end of the day the CORRECT decision has been made”…
Time for Paddy to take his golden handshake… IRB reffing needs some new blood!
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:48 am
Reply to DavidS @ 11:36 am:
Unfortunately the asswhipe is correct:
That is the law as it now stands.
You may recall my various posts that the
powers of the TMO should be widened.
He should also have been allowed to call
the earlier pass in this move, and the one
leading to Cowan’s “try”.
They were both forward. (BTW where’s Brand?)
Because of his elevated vantage point the
TMO in some cases have a better view of the
play than the three adjudicators at ground
level.
How many forward pass tries are we going
to see in the RWC?
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:52 am
Reply to Boertjie @ 11:48 am:
Correction, it is not the law, it is protocol.
Another important point to note is one Paul Dobson made on Rugby365: “The protocol is not a part of the Laws of the Game, just a regulation of a process of applying the laws.”
What Paddy’s reaction should have been is; “Wow, this is really an area we can look at to change the current protocol as this case proves without any doubt”
Not: “How dare they go beyond the rules I have laid down for them!”
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:54 am
What this incident suggests to me is that the final pass, ONLY if made inside the opposition or defending team’s 22 meter area, can also be reviewed if there is any doubt.
The reason the official could not make a call on this is because they could not keep up with the play, and we cannot expect them to really (not with a break away with guys the speed of Dagg), which makes perfect sense to check that final pass if doubt exists.
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:56 am
Reply to Morné @ 11:52 am:
Laws, protocol – whatever, it give 0 Brain a foot to stand on.
But thanks for the correction.
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:58 am
I suppose the same protocol should have been
applied had the question been: “Any reason why
I should disallow the try?”
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Reply to Morné @ 11:54 am:
The Frog try that nailed the ABs in 2007
was way outside the 22, not?
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:06 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 12:00 pm:
It was much further up-field correct, but the difference was the ref was right there, he could make a call, he made the wrong one.
Ref was not close enough to make the call in this Saturday’s incident, which will only every really happen when players outstrip him for pace in a break away – that is why I say, only the final pass, only inside defending team’s 22.
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:08 pm
It is also interesting that Clancy said ‘Yes’ when asked if he wanted information prior to grounding…
He should have said ‘No’ as he knew this was against protocol, but no doubt he saw the forward pass on the big screen replays and knew what the correct decision should be…
In SA, when 50 000 fans saw this too, can you imagine the reaction if he awarded that knowing he, and 50 000 people in the stadium knew it to be wrong?
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:13 pm
What gets to me is that on only three occasions has Pattie NoBrain actually thrown a tantrum publicly and on all three occasions it was because he felt the All Blacks had been done in…
It REALLY is about time the IRB did something to him… he’s embarrassing them and referees all over the world…
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Morne
Rules are laws
Protocols ae guidelines developed to apply the rules, so the protoicols that bald pated vaginal discharge issued are NOT binding on the refs… it’s the same as when he issued his rules about how the scrum, set should be called… there is nothing binding on that… it’s supposed to be a help for them to apply the rules not some sort of Himmelfehrts Fuhrerbefehl to be obeyed to the last drop of blood…
It’s like when the police get powers of arrest… the office of the commissioner issues them with a protoicol to effect a lawful arrest… there is nothing binding about the protocol… it’s a suggested way to assist in correct application of rules… basically a practical guideline.
Now CowPattie NoBrain has apparently lost the plot and thinks his protocols are a Fuhrerbefehl….
I hope that our Andre Watson gives that bald headed vaginal discharge a bit of East Rand this morning because it surely looks like he deserves it…
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:24 pm
I suppose to have SARU issue a statement in support of Johan Meuwissen and telling CowPattie NoBrain to f**koff is too much to expect…
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Sheezuz… no prizes for guessing who is doing the RW Facebook updates and intro’s… LOL!
Hope there are no kids reading them…
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 12:51 pm:
Eish, not good advertising for the RW site
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:05 pm
My first two intros this morning were something special though…
And there is no swear word anywhere to be found…
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:43 pm
FFS – anybody who knows ANYTHING about rugby (and have been following RuggaWorld the last TWO years) will have known that – the RIGHT decision WAS NOT taken !!!
F*cked – how many more times must this be explained – a forward pass is NOT a forward pass when the ball goes forward !!!
Open your eyes – wake-up!!!
And given that there was NO forward pass – how the hell can any Referee, let alone the TMO, make such a diabolically decision !!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:44 pm
I am truly shocked that this site – a site proclaiming to be informed supporters of the game – can have this soooo wrong !!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 2:43 pm:
hehehehehehe
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 2:43 pm:
Ready for another physics lesson?
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 2:44 pm:
Waar kruip jy so baie weg?
Ons het jou nodig, anders gaan hierdie site
heeltemal in sy moer.
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:51 pm
Ollie ek het TWEE jaar gewag vir hierdie ene
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 2:05 pm:
Oh they cracked me up alright… but fortunately for me it wasn’t breakfast time either
Reply to The Brand @ 2:43 pm:
Player received it in front of the passing player from what I saw… not the old ‘ball travelling forward thingy’ we watched on youtube here on RW many times…
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Morne – it was never the “physics” it was ALWAYS the impossibility of SEEING the direction the hands are moving while the pass is IN execution – specifically given the FACT that the flight of the ball may NOT be used as indication – BUT ONLY the hands AT TIME of the act of passing
:angry:
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 2:56 pm:
Correct, the ball will ‘move forward’ 99% of the time its passed whilst the players are in motion. Even if it is passed ‘backwards’.
However, when your pass it forward (receiver in front of the ball carrier) a the moment the pass is executed or leaves the passing player’s hands, it is quite clearly and simply a forward pass!
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Bryce – don’t spoil my FUN
I want to see Morne and Deon grovel !!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:00 pm
No no no Morne – stick to the physics !!!
You are not allowed to become logical like JT and me
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Boertjie
Ek mis site en vrinne woes !!!
Lees so nu en dan op BB.
Maar dis flippin frustrating op BB. Na so paar post is ek sooo geirriteerd en gatvol van die sukkel dat ek heeltemal TE suur is om sinvolle bydrae te maak.
Site sal nie vergaan nie oudste – stadiger van tyd tot tyd – maar vergaan . . . Ek dink nie so nie !!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 2:58 pm:
Hehe… jammer tog…
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 3:00 pm:
Well it is simple physics…
If the energy which propels the ball is in a forward motion or towards the opponents goal line in reference to the subject or energy source then the pass is deemed to be forward. More so when that subject or source is in a stationary position and not moving himself.
If the source however is in motion and that motion or speed and direction of the motion is greater than the speed and direction applied to the object (ball) the object’s trajectory will equate to the energy/direction/speed of the source applying the energy to the object minus the energy/direction/speed applied to the object (ball) in question.
Therefore while the trajectory of the object might be forward (force of the source moving is greater than the energy applied) but the action (pass) was not.
You want the formula?
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:14 pm
Morne THAT is the point – the hands and thus passing is hardly ever CLEAR at all !!!
The ball going forward IS – and therefore the pass is SIMPLY forward !!!
Maybe this bullshit can be laid to rest by Referees telling us if the SEE the hands EVERY time a pass is made – I am sure 99% of the times they DO NOT !!!
Thus the follow the flight of the ball – if it “seems” to have gone forward (and they can not use the BS of Aus physics) they call the pass – forward – not on physics, not on the hands in the act of passing – BUT PURE and CLEAR and SIMPLY on the flight of the ball going forward from passer to receiver !!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:25 pm
On another topic, does anybody know of any sites that will definitely be streaming the RWC games. I know Myp2p and Justintv PROBABLY will but I want to be sure, even if it is a paysite.
I had issues withMyp2p on Friday with the Bulls game so I want to be sure to get the games.
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 3:14 pm:
I am struggling to understand what part of over 90% of passes in rugby the ball drifts forward because of the simple physics that applies?
If we are to blow every single pass in which the ball travels forward (in relations to the field or z-axis) we will blow up just about every single pass – good luck watching rugby then.
If we however judge the motion of the pass (direction of hands) we judge the ACTION, not the result.
The ACTION must be sanctioned, hence the foul is referred to as a forward PASS, not forward MOVEMENT of the ball in relation to the field or z-axis.
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Reply to Ollie_ Shark Attack @ 3:25 pm:
Try http://www.sport1.de
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Reply to JT_Proooooovince! @ 3:27 pm:
Thanks, I’ll have a look
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:11 pm
Reply to Ollie_ Shark Attack @ 3:44 pm:
Check here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Rugby_World_Cup#Broadcasting
I don’t see Belgium or Austria there, but it may be of help.
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:24 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 4:11 pm:
Thanks, don’t see any channels that are available on Belgian TV
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:25 pm
i agree, the facebook RW posts are too aggro. It does not reflect the site and the people that hang out here.
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Reply to Ollie_ Shark Attack @ 4:24 pm:
Don’t you get france 2?
Sport1 only show a few on tv but all on-line at a price!
August 22nd, 2011 at 5:23 pm
Reply to Peter “i started a joke” Divs needs our support! @ 4:25 pm:
Sad. Fortunately I don’t do FB
neither Twitter,
August 22nd, 2011 at 5:28 pm
I KNOW you are struggling !!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 22nd, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Reply to Peter “i started a joke” Divs needs our support! @ 4:25 pm:
I’m not sure whether you are either serious or whether youi have actually been amazingly humorous …
whichever those two posts have elicited the most responses we have ever had on an FB repost of an RW article.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:31 pm
In the end…the correct decision was made on this one. Kudos to Johan Meeuwesen for getting it right.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:50 pm
Reply to JT_Proooooovince! @ 4:59 pm:
Is France 2 showing all the matches?
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:54 pm
Reply to Ollie_ Shark Attack @ 10:50 pm:
France have the rwc on eurosport fr, fr2 and canal+… Which they show we will have to wait and see.
August 23rd, 2011 at 12:35 am
He is not only pro-kiwi biased but he definetly dont smaak south africa, of course along with his mates Stu DICKinson, Dronky Walshsss, Alain Fucking douche Rolland and Honiss.
Did Paddie bitch when Bryce Lawrence made up new rules to basically kill any Sharks semi finals hopes?
I think these oukes, like a few trolls on Voldy’s are still stuck in the Apartheid era.
As anyone got the stats for refs. Which ref has given the South Africans the mose yellows and reds and which ref has officated the most south african losses?
I stopped wathcing S15 this year due to Lawrences match fixing ways and it seems I will Kick the tri-nations in to touch this year too.
August 23rd, 2011 at 10:29 am
Kevin
Paddy has on three occasions openly and publicly critted a ref
1. Stu Dickenson for screwing over NZ in 3N
2. Craig Joubert for screwing over NZ in 3N
3. Clancy / Meeuwesen for screwing over NZ in 3N
Is there perhaps a pattern you see emerging here?
I wonder if the IRB has the guts to do something about it but my guess they all have black envy so there is no way they’ll do anything just the Clets and Saxons will glibly sing along to the Kiwi tail… Even ARU has been despicably silent on the issue.
I must say I am disgusted with SARU and Andre Watson as head of SA REferees.
When Paddy castigated Stu Dickenson the ARU and Aus Refs publicly jumped down his throat so far their heads were sticking out his asshole while their togs were kicking his teeth out till he made a groveling public apology.
The fact that SARU and Andre Watson have sacrificed Meeuwisson on this altar of expedient refusal to criticize anything in public like true gentlemen shows just how naive they are… they should be using the media to have a full go at Paddy and his pro Kiwi ways.
In fact Andre Watson was the one who told me he and refs were accepting of mistakes… if this was a mistake… and I mean IF… the Watson should have the courage of his convictions to stand up for Meeuwisson and SARU should be in the same line right behind to tell Paddy NoBrain to stick his pro NZ bias so deep up his ass the ferns leaves get stuck in his teeth…
Andre I know you read RW so what is it going to be?
August 23rd, 2011 at 10:34 am
Reply to DavidS @ 8:32 pm:
no dawie I get it – it works (the aggro) because its populist. It playes on anger. Its a game Zuma started and Malema is finishing.
Yet its very un-Ruggaworld?
August 23rd, 2011 at 10:51 am
Reply to JT_Proooooovince! @ 10:54 pm:
We only get France 2 in flanders, I countrymen across the language border get the others apparently.