TMO controversy - Foul play
In the match between Ireland and Italy, the referee refers an incident to the television match official, asking him if a try had been scored and asking him to be aware of the possibility of foul play. The TMO reports that try had not been scored and that there had been no foul play in in-goal. The referee awards a drop-out to Italy.
Italy are on the attack near the Irish 22. Eoin Reddan gets the ball and passes to Denis Leamy who passes to Gordon D’Arcy who passes to Tommy Bowe on the blind side. Bowe runs, kicks ahead, chases, flykicks as the ball skids to the left and flykicks again, this time into in-goal. Bowe races for the ball just ahead of Tommaso Benvenuti of Italy. Benvenuti puts a right arm around Bowe. Bowe reaches for the ball.
The referee refers the incident to the TMO asking him to look for two things – try or no try and foul play.
The TMO has several looks. It is clear that Bowe did not ground the ball.
The TMO advises the referee: “No try has been scored and there was no foul play in in-goal.”
The commentators are surprised. One, who has said that a penalty try would be awarded if a try was likely to have been scored, says: “The man was tackled without the ball while he was diving to score a try. If that not foul play, what constitutes foul play?”
Of course it is foul play.
Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous tackling. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously.
Sanction: Penalty kick
Playing a player without the ball is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(f) Playing an opponent without the ball. Except in a scrum, ruck or maul, a player who is not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.
Benvenuti played Bowe without the ball. That constituted foul play.
The TMO does not deny that foul play occurred. What he said was that there had been no foul play in in-goal.
Do you remember Port Elizabeth this year – the forward pass from Israel Dagg to Jimmy Cowan who went over. The pass was not detected by the referee but revealed by the TMO. The referee did not award the try – right decision, wrong means, and the IRB made it clear that this was wrong because it was out of the TMO protocol which says:
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).
At the time the IRB’s refereeing boss, Paddy O’Brien said about the match officials for the World Cup: “They will be told there should not be any breach of protocol as there was on this occasion.”
Bear that in mind as you look at the clip.
Where does Benvenuti grab Bowe?
Both players are still in the field of play. That is what the TMO reported when he said “there was no foul play in in-goal”. In his opinion the foul play had happened in the field of play and he was not entitled to rule on that.
That much is true.
Law 6.A.6 REFEREE CONSULTING WITH OTHERS
(b) A match organiser may appoint an official who uses technological devices. If the referee is unsure when making a decision in in-goal involving a try being scored or a touch down, that official may be consulted.
The official may be consulted if the referee is unsure when making a decision in in-goal with regard to the scoring of a try or a touch down when foul play in in-goal may have been involved.
foul play in in-goal
But the foul play continues into the in-goal. It would seem sensible that the TMO could report that.
But the TMO’s reasoning is not without sense – not at all. In fact the precedent of the incident is worth examining to formulate a principle.
The referee and his assistant, without wings like the kiwis, had no hope of keeping up with Bowe. And they had no recourse to close-up, slow-motion replays.
