Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Fan concern over TMO audio legitimate – Andy Goode

The moment Stephan Lewies collided with Owen Farrell last Saturday (Screenshot via TNT Sports)

The statement from the professional game match officials team (PGMOT) and the RFU on last Saturday’s Gallagher Premiership TMO incident at Tottenham raises more questions than answers, but there is only one person who comes out of all this badly.

ADVERTISEMENT

We know it was “regrettable” and it shouldn’t have happened but the statement didn’t address the fact that TMO Stuart Terheege was heard saying, “The problem I have got now is it looks like Austin (Healey) has instigated it, so I don’t want to talk about it.”

I understand the authorities want to back their man but that is the crux of the issue: Terheege wouldn’t have needed to say that if he’d already made his decision, as the statement seems to suggest, so I don’t think anyone is buying that.

Video Spacer

Are Ireland really the best team in the world? | RPTV

The Boks Office boys discuss Andy Farrell and Finn Russell’s contrasting statements. Watch the full Six Nations breakdown on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Video Spacer

Are Ireland really the best team in the world? | RPTV

The Boks Office boys discuss Andy Farrell and Finn Russell’s contrasting statements. Watch the full Six Nations breakdown on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Perhaps an even bigger issue that people aren’t making as much of is the fact that Terheege was heard saying “don’t show it” to the match director.

I appreciate fans are concerned that TMOs are being influenced by commentators and co-commentators, but there is no way that TMOs should be trying to prevent things from being shown.

Related

As a viewer, or someone involved in the business of rugby who might be seriously affected by these decisions, you want to see all the best angles and replays you can of every incident within the obvious time constraints there are.

We bemoan TV directors, those in France in particular, at times when they want to show arty shots or focus on the crowd and there is action that we feel we should be seeing or replays that aren’t being aired.

ADVERTISEMENT

Clearly, it is also plain for everyone to see that you can’t opt not to make a decision as a TMO because Healey or any other former player has spotted it first and drawn attention to it.

I can’t help but think this incident has triggered people more than it would have done if Sam Warburton or Brian O’Driscoll were at the heart of it. It has made more waves just because Healey has plenty of detractors on social media and seems to polarise opinion.

If people were able to put their personal opinion of him to one side, or if you speak to anyone in the industry, he is without doubt one of the sharpest minds around, is rapid with his analysis, and spots things that others simply don’t.

Maybe we do need to tighten up the process so that TMOs never hear any commentary as opposed to the explanation that they “do not actively listen or react to the broadcast commentary team”, but I guarantee more incidents will be missed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Healey and others have played the game at the highest level and are used to analysing it in great detail. It is only natural that they will spot things that TMOs will miss at times, so sometimes it can be helpful that they are being heard initially as long as they aren’t influenced.

That is obviously the key and the process is supposed to allow for commentary to be heard to a certain extent, up to the point that something looks like it is about to be referred to the TMO and then it is cut.

The “location at matches” concerning the TMO referred to in the statement is neither here nor there because they are obviously nowhere near the commentators and most of the television production is done off-site nowadays.

They could be in a remote location, as happens with VAR in football at Stockley Park, rather than in a truck in the car park. They could also have their own VT operator acting as their director and showing them different angles, but that all costs money and they would still obviously have to liaise with the match director.

I do understand fans’ concerns that TMOs hear commentary and I would be on board with them being in an even more independent setting with their own operator if the budget is there for it. Maybe that will happen with this having prompted a conversation.

It should be said that a TMO’s job is really tough because you are looking out for absolutely everything and rugby is a fast-paced sport where things are happening in different places at the same time and you have to make quick decisions.

Two sets of eyes are better than one and it will make the job harder without hearing anything other than the referee and with more minimal contact with the match director. But if a TMO is, for some bizarre reason, feeling he can’t make a decision because it has been brought to light by a co-commentator, then more clearly defined lines are obviously needed.

The statement concluded by saying, “All parties will continue to work hard to further refine and perfect systems to ensure player safety and high-quality rugby.” So maybe that will change in the near future.

Lifting the curtain is always interesting and it added a bit of extra drama and intrigue to a great weekend of Premiership rugby.

It wasn’t ideal but there is only one person who comes out of it all badly and that, unfortunately for him, is the TMO Terheege.

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
B
BigMaul 294 days ago

storm in a teacup really. Penalty only so play on as the try was scored.

Now the real question is: why was Maitland allowed to pass the ball off the floor? That is illegal but refs never pick it up.

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 20 minutes ago
Six former All Blacks eligible for new nations in 2025

What do you mean should?


Are you asking these questions because you think they are important reasons a player should decide to represent a country?


I think that is back the front. They are good reasons why someone 'would' be able to choose Fiji (say in the case of Mo'unga's cousin who the Drua brought into their environment), but not reason's why they "should". Those need to be far more personal imo.


If you think it was me suggesting he "should" play for Fiji, I certainly wasn't suggesting that. I was merely suggesting he would/could because ther'ye very close to his heart with his dad having represented them.


I did go on to say the right sort of environment should be created to encourage them to want to represent Fiji (as with case of their european stars it's always a fine balance between wanting to play for them and other factors (like compared with personal develop at their club). but that is also not trying to suggest those players should want to play for Fiji simply because you make the prospect better, you're simply allowing for it to happen.


TLDR I actually sent you to the wrong post, I was thinking more about my reply to HU's sentiments with yours. Instead of running you around I'll just paste it in

What's wrong with that? Hoskins Sotutu could be selected for the Maori All Blacks, then go on latter and move to England and represent them, then once his career in England (no longer at that standard) is over move to Japan and finish his career playing for Fiji. Why should he not be able to represent any or all of those teams?

Actually I can't remember if it was that message or whether it indeed was my hypothetical Fiji example that I wanted to suggest would improve the International game, not cheapen it.


I suppose I have to try and explain that idea further now. So you say it cheapens the game. They game is already "cheap" when a nation like Fiji is only really allowed to get their full team going in a WC year. Or even it's the players themselves only caring about showing up in a WC year. To me this is a problem because a Fiji campaign/season isn't comparable to their competitors (in a situation where they're say ranked in the top 8. Take last year for instance. Many stars were absent of the Pacific Nations Cup, for whatever reason, but hey, when their team is touring a big EU nation like England or Ireland, wow suddenly theyre a high profile team again and they get the stars back.


Great right? No. Having those players come back was probably detrimental to the teams performance. My idea of having Sotutu and Bower encouraged (directly or indirectly) to play for Fiji is merely as a means to an end, to give the Flying Fijians the profile to both enrich and more accurately reflect the international game. You didn't really state what you dislike but it's easy to guess, and yes, this idea does utilize that aspect which does devalue the game in other cases, so I wanted to see if this picture would change that in this example (just and idea I was throwing out their, like I also said in my post, I don't actually think Sotutu or any of these players are going anywhere, even Ioane might still be hopeful of being slected).


The idea again, raise the visibility on the PNC so that can stand as a valued tournament on it's own and not require basic funded by WR to continue, but not enough to involve all the best players (even Japan treated it as a chance to play it's amatuers). Do this by hosting the PI island pool in places like Melbourne every other year, include some very high profile and influential team in it like an All Black team, and yes, by the nations getting together and creating ways to increase it's popularity by say asking individuals like Sotutu and Bower to strength it's marketability, with the hopeful follow on affect that stars like Botia and Radradra always want to (and can) represent their country. With Fiji as the example, but do it with Samoa and Tonga as well. They will need NZ and Aus (Japan) assistance to make a reality imo.


I don't believe this cheapens the game, I believe it makes it more valued as you're giving players the choice of who they chose to play for rather than basing it off money. Sotutu would never have forgone his paycheck to play for Fiji instead of NZ at the beginning, so you should viewed his current choice as 'cheap'

29 Go to comments
J
JW 2 hours ago
Six former All Blacks eligible for new nations in 2025

What's wrong with that? Hoskins Sotutu could be selected for the Maori All Blacks, then go on latter and move to England and represent them, then once his career in England (no longer at that standard) is over move to Japan and finish his career playing for Fiji. Why should he not be able to represent any or all of those teams?

just playing for a pro-club a few years is no valid reason in my opinion

Ah, yes, you just have the wrong end of the stick. This has nothing to do with club footy (and can't really happen anymore), for example if the countries involved allowed it, Hoskins could represent all his national teams while playing for say, Moana Pacifika (a team unrelated to any nation). He is playing for countries because they mean something to him, ie like Ardiea Savea's decision, they just want to contribute something to their Island heritage. It's not like Fiji are going to ring the worlds best number 8 by that point in his career.


I do understand where you're coming from though (as what you're thinking was the case a while ago), but the world is changing more. Take this Sotutu England situation, this is becoming less and less likely from happening (at least in this example anyway), as the England Rugby union is not more in charge of payments and not seen as just icing on the cake to a massive club deal (that's how the English game got itself broke in the first place), and nations like Ireland have stated they are no longer going to look offshore etc. So the landscape is improving slowly.


This is all hypothetical remember. Sotutu is most likely to become a key All Black this year as he's the perfect foil a team with tyro's like Sititi, Lakai, Savea is going to need.

29 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Three winners, three losers from the England Six Nations squad reveal Three winners, three losers from the England Six Nations squad reveal
Search