@zzypt idk, maybe i read it wrong, but I took his point to be not that refs shouldn’t be overruled by technology-assisted reviews, but rather that the protocol is too restrictive and that there should be more of an element of trust, which I think is a good call. Ruling has becoming increasingly “legalistic” if that’s the right expression…
@zzypt I’m sure you are right about the protocol being meant to back the refs and it’s a very common thing not restricted to sports. But it’s still a mistake to make these very specific rules precisely because of the reason you mention: they won’t fit every case anyway and they tend to interfere with common sense decisions. I think we need more trust in the referees and less specific protocols…
@zzypt Here I disagree. The TMO didn’t overturn the (unproblematic) call by the ref because he thought he needed to see the ball on the ground. But you could see how it slipped off the shoe that held it up initially. What could have prevented it from being grounded? A French hand possibly materializing from somewhere? A gravity anomaly? A common sense call would have been a try but the protocol prevented it, thats the complaint, or at least its mine.
The protocol used to let the TMO decide and they complained about that too. They said the ref should not be overridden unless they were without doubt because decision go made then someone found another angle or a photo.
Far better to focus on the rugby not the refs. We’ve had plenty of evidence that criticising refs leads to some really bad reactions, it needs to stop.
@zzypt well we need some rules, so we can’t just focus on the rugby, and the current TMO protocols are silly if they lead to decisions informed by highly speculative counterfactuals as they have been in that last scene in Scotland v France.
The idea that there can be a protocol that prevents the TMO from making decisions is silly and should be abandoned.
@philippsteinkrueger
But TMOs make mistakes too. There were exactly these debates before. They’d argue that the TMO shouldn’t be allowed to overrule the ref when there was no video proof the ball did touch the ground.
@philippsteinkrueger
But this is my original point, you have to let the officials make their decisions, the TMO will make mistakes, refs will make mistakes. Giving the ref precedence allows the game to flow better, so we go with that.
Mistakes are always made but officials are always “right” because that’s how the game works. Save the articles for understanding the game.
@zzypt then we agree, but that’s not the situation we are in atm and that’s what I read in the article: the TMO is not trusted to make a decision to based on their best judgment but is forced by the protocol, which is too strict and produces silly outcomes. We should revert to the time before such strict protocols. Of course we would still have people complaining but they’d just be wrong.
@zzypt I understand and you are right, but I’m not looking for a way that will please all the people all of the time. I just think that those people who thought the strict protocols we have now would be the solution were mistaken. I don’t care if they are unhappy if we revert.
Add comment