Thoughts on a TMO's decision
The television match official advised the referee that a try had been scored, and the coach of the losing team was up in arms about it.
The incident happened in the second half of the match between Wales and Scotland at Millennium Stadium in Cardiff. Not that it’s relevant to the decision though it may well have been relevant to the coach’s reported wrath, Wales were leading 20-15 at the time.
Shane Williams skated on an arc, straightened up and dived for the corner as Scotland’s big Nikki Walker dived at him.
Williams grounded the ball in the goal area, but the referee referred the matter to the television match official. It was a difficult decision. In the end the TMO advised that a try had been scored and the referee awarded the try.
The Scotland coach, Frank Hadden, a gentlemanly man, is reported as launching a “scathing attack” on match officials and saying: “The video ref clearly got it wrong.”
“Clearly” must be an exaggeration. It is understandable that the coach is suffering. He would be under the enormous pressure from without and from within himself. In two matches in the Six Nations, Scotland has failed to score a try. In three matches prior to that Scotland scored one try. One try in 400 minutes’ worth of rugby. It suggests that there may be bigger problems than a momentary mistake by a television match official.
But was it a mistake?
There is a principle that all referees subscribe to – you whistle for what you see, not what you don’t see. If you have doubt, you do not whistle. It’s not a matter of giving the benefit of the doubt to an attacker or ball-carrier; it just means not acting when in doubt. It is a principle that applies to all decisions – knock-on, forward pass, off-side, foul play – the lot.
If you do not apply that principle, you enter the realm of guesswork which is a soul mate of dishonesty.
The TMO has a checklist.
Was the ball grounded? Yes. If the answer had been no, there would have been no further need to worry.
Was Williams’s right foot in touch? Careful watching suggests that it was not in touch.
Did his left thigh hit the cornerpost before he grounded the ball? Hard but it seemed that it had not done so. The baggy post does not start to bend till after the ball was grounded.
That leaves his left foot. Does it touch the touch-line? It’s hard to see, looking down from above, as the TMO would have done.
Does his left foot touch the ground in touch? It’s also so hard to see but what about that little piece of turf that moves further into touch? Where did the divot come from?
It could not have come from Walker’s feet as they were in the air.
If it did indeed come from Williams’s left foot, the try should not have been scored.
But it could have come from Williams’s right foot which was not in touch. If that were the case, the try was the correct decision.
Unless there is evidence which the TMO did not have, it would seem that it would have had to have taken guesswork to deny the try. And guesswork, as we have said, is wrong.
In that case awarding the try seems honest and reasonable.
<B>There is a clip of the incident on <A href="http://www.sareferees.co.za.www.sareferees.co.za.</b>
