Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

SANZAAR Enhances Super Rugby TMO Protocol

1TMO

SANZAAR has today announced that it has made an amendment to the Television Match Official (TMO) protocol for the 2017 Super Rugby season.

The amendment reflects the emerging technology that is now available in terms of the number of camera angles and the use of split-screen television software. Plus SANZAAR’s desire to tighten the process and make it more accurate, more efficient and to reduce the time taken for the decision-making process.

So what is different in 2017?

Should the referee or one of his team (Assistant Referees or TMO), wish to initiate a review of a decision (via replay by the TMO), the referee will first state to the TMO his “on-field decision” based on his real-time view. The TMO will then review the given incident accordingly based on the referee’s assessment.

The TMO must be persuaded that the evidence is compelling before proving the on-field referee’s call wrong, and therefore overturning the call.

‘What’ can be referred for review remains the same as the World Rugby Protocol (no change). The “two phases back only” protocol still stands.

The only exception to this process is in the case of a potential foul play incident. The referee can choose to review the incident on the big screen (or request the TMO to review it if the replay screen is of poor quality) with no “on-field decision” prior to the review.

Commenting on the new protocol SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos said, “The general consensus is that with the new technology and the protocol of a definitive “on-field call”, time is saved and the awkward conversation between referee and TMO that occurs from time to time is eliminated.”

“SANZAAR is confident this will enhance the fan’s match experience. This also aligns our sport’s process with that of almost all the other high performance sports, which use a television replay protocol.”

“In summary, this protocol change makes the process clean and efficient and places accountability for an “on-field call” in the hands of the referee and a review of that decision in the hands of the TMO,” added Marinos.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Kubota Spears vs Saitama Wild Knights | Japan Rugby League One 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

The gruelling reality behind one of the fastest sports in the world | The Report

Boks Office | Episode 40 | The Steven Kitshoff Special

Perry Baker in the house | HSBC Life on Tour | Los Angeles

O2 Inside Line: All In | Episode 6 | Le Crunch

The Unexpected Journey to USA 7s Glory | Aaron Cummings | Sevens Wonders

USA vs Japan | Full Match Replay

Yokohama Canon Eagles vs Shizuoka BlueRevs | Japan Rugby League One 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Confidence knocks and finding your people | Flo Williams | Rugby Rising Locker Room

Tackling reasons for drop-out in sport | Zainab Alema | Rugby Rising Locker Room

Jet Lag: The biggest challenge facing international sports? | The Report

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

N
Nickers 49 minutes ago
USA team in Super Rugby Pacific is not the answer right now, but this is

The question for any expansion is - what is the point?


On one hand talking about expanding for commercial reasons, but then saying younger squad members would play giving big names a rest making it more for development purposes?


The problem with SRP is it serves two masters - fans who want a good competition to watch, but also the national teams in developing players so they can go on to become international players.


The case for maximising young player development:


A major problem NZ and Australia have is at U20s. AR and NZR would be best served by investing in proper U20 super rugby competition that runs in conjunction with Super Rugby, rather than the one-off carnival style thing that happens at the moment. 20 year olds coming out of France and England in particular, but also France are noticeably more developed than the equivalent players from NZ, Australia and even SA.


NZ and Australia probably both have one too many teams in SR. If you’re taking a long term view they are best served by cutting teams from the comp now and improving the quality even more. Although MP have been good this year there is also an argument for cutting them too, and reducing to 8 teams that all play each other home and away in a round robin. It would be a ridiculously strong competition with a lot of depth if all the best players are redistributed.


This in conjunction with a full U20s competition (possibly playing just one round rather than 2) would make NZ and Australia international teams much stronger with a lot more depth.


But that solution would make less money and cost more.


NPC would need to be fully amateur or semi-pro at best in this model. If you cross reference the losses NZR posted today with the costs they have previously published about operating the NPC, you can attribute a huge amount, if not all of the losses, to the NPC. At the moment this is putting way too much money into a failing high performance competition at the expense of development.

12 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Brendan Fanning: 'Leinster have the best-resourced squad in these islands but can’t make it pay.' Brendan Fanning: 'Leinster have the best-resourced squad in these islands but can’t make it pay.'
Search