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

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

KOKO Show | July 8th | Bernard Foley stops by to talk the Wallabies winning and Lions being tested

England v South Africa | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

Georgia vs Ireland | Men’s International | Full Match Replay

Lions Share | Episode 2

Chile vs Romania | Men’s International | Full Match Replay

USA vs Belgium | Men’s International | Full Match Replay

Touchdown in Dublin, The Red Sea Returns & We Prepare to Face Argentina | Ep 2: The Ultimate Test

South Africa v British & Irish Lions | 2009 | Second Test | The Vaults

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
B
BigMaul 471 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 2 minutes ago
Can Les Bleus avoid a Black-wash in New Zealand?

Common now, I checked, and I have also seen your replies to Graham just now. You know the AB tests rated higher. A ‘Friendly’! You know they go back in history even further, right?


So I can’t believe you are correct when you say it brings in the money. I can understand though playing better nations than those in the 6N but which don’t have a profile (like how Argentina is still a hard rate in NZ even after years of high performance), don’t generate the same interest as Wales etc. You’re also not going to have a SA or a NZ touring every November, and Wallabies are no longer the benchmark.


I mean I wouldn’t doubt that the most obvious revenue factor is a 6N component, not trying to say that it isn’t, just that fans show that it needn’t be. November test should still generate a high amount of revenue. As a topic it is all redundant now as the November tests (and July) are going to have a competitive factor.


Hopefully the quality of nations continue to rise and you can have three blockbuster teams touring every year in the not too distant future. 10 or 11 games might be right around the perfect number for a minimum tier 1 test nation too. I’m sure you’re going to make the rest of your season fit around that (those aren’t 100% things at all).


So although WR have already implemented change, I do still agree with your opinion that things are pretty good as they are. I only see a little improvement needed before France can really step up to All Blacks or Springbok level. You might think that a joke and that you will always look up to these teams but as a nation you really can do/go one better.

342 Go to comments
J
JW 19 minutes ago
Can Les Bleus avoid a Black-wash in New Zealand?

It was a reply to both your posts sorry, I mean stuff you replied to NB about only focusing on 6N and hoping that.. narrowness will benefit a WC campaign.


I think WCs are harder to win than that (requires many factors other than being able to play the best winning rugby), and 5 matches that aren’t must win and are broken up is not a good test (especially compared what the All Blacks offered).

I’m fully aware that French International players participation into Top 14, European Cups & 6 Nations will hinder their preparation for a WC.

So I wasn’t saying suggesting that. Your competitions are fine, they just aren’t going to provide everything.


Interesting insight on the last campaign, and again, those components they’re adding are also practical and sensible attempts to improve their chances at a WC. So they question remains, why go to those lengths and throw it all away by not picking a better team to travel to New Zealand?


I’ve suggested in other topics they are really close to making it work, but also the data that’s been presented in this articles shows that even now they could have also made the tour to NZ work.


That is both in the view as presented here by NB and what other players were available, and in the long term planning that you say Galthie has undertaken, in not taking the opportunity to make it work even better (factors like the dates of these tests could have seen finalists available from test 1) for a tour like this.


TBH, I can understand if Galthie made a calculated decision to undervalue the tour. Many have had a bad opinion about the All Blacks ability/level under Foster, and even in test 1 he might have shown such an attitude to be correct still under Razor.

342 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING The Lions star Ben Earl concedes is 'double the player I am' The Lions star Ben Earl concedes is 'double the player I am'
Search