Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

The no-try call against the Chiefs that's left everyone baffled except for the TMO

Etene Nanai-Seturo. (Photo by Michael Bradley/Getty Images)

There were tense scenes in the closing stages of the Chiefs’ 19-13 victory over the Reds at Waikato Stadium in Hamilton on Friday as the hosts repelled wave after wave of Queensland attack on their own tryline in hope of preserving the scoreline for a much-needed win.

ADVERTISEMENT

Although they managed to hold out the visitors, their job could have been made a lot easier had a try early in the first half been awarded to young Chiefs wing Etene Nanai-Seturo.

The 19-year-old looked to have scored in the left-hand corner inside the opening six minutes despite the best defensive efforts of Reds fullback Matt McGahan and openside flanker Liam Wright.

Many, including television commentators Rikki Swannell, Willie Lose and Richard Turner, were convinced that the teenage prodigy had dotted down to open the scoring for the match, but after referee Angus Gardner consulted with television match official Glenn Newman, the play was ruled as a ‘no-try’ due to a knock on.

Gardner’s on-field decision was ‘try’, meaning Newman had to find a ‘clear and obvious’ reason to overturn the original decision.

Replays at normal speed appeared to show that Nanai-Seturo had grounded the ball, but as Newman slowed replays down to a frame-by-frame motion, a slight gap between the ball and Nanai-Seturo’s grasp was evident.

Etene Nanai-Seturo’s disallowed try. Photo / RugbyPass
ADVERTISEMENT

Consequently, Newman told Gardner to overturn his decision, leaving the Chiefs, commentators and the majority of the Waikato Stadium crowd stunned at the decision.

It is believed that Newman watched replays of the play from a different angle from what was broadcasted both on TV and on the big screen at Waikato Stadium, but a failure to show that angle to spectators, commentators and players alike left many in disbelief at the decision.

“I didn’t see it [the separation], did you?” Chiefs head coach Colin Cooper said post-match, with skipper Sam Cane expressing similar sentiments.

“I literally just took one glance and thought ‘try time’,” he said.

“We jogged back, we talked about we were going to do from the next kickoff. I haven’t seen it again, to be honest, so hard to comment.”

Cooper, who had expressed concerns for inconsistencies shown by TMOs earlier in the week, and Cane weren’t the only ones perplexed by the controversial call, with many taking to Twitter to vent their confusion.

https://twitter.com/shaunnzht/status/1131828160910188545

https://twitter.com/bastardsheep/status/1131828209568239616

ADVERTISEMENT

https://twitter.com/jordii_dana/status/1131828289226432512

https://twitter.com/Maroelab00m/status/1131828478310060032

Reds head coach Brad Thorn held a different view to most, however, as he commended the refereeing of the under-fire officials.

“We had two disallowed in the first half, one where Sam [Cane] basically dragged our guy over the tryline. But I’m happy, those guys do a tough job every week. I think they’re doing a good job there,” he said.

“Like I keep saying, it’s a tough old gig, the crowd doesn’t usually cheer for the referees. A lot of people critique it, how about having a go at it first and then see how it goes.”

Nevertheless, the Chiefs had the last laugh, with their victory moving them up to 10th spot, just two points shy of a play-offs spot, while the Reds remain in 14th place, five points off the pace of the top eight.

In other news:

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

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

F
Flankly 2 minutes ago
'Absolute madness': Clive Woodward rips into Borthwick in wake of NZ loss

Borthwick is supposed to be the archetypical conservative coach, the guy that might not deliver a sparkling, high-risk attacking style, but whose teams execute the basics flawlessly. And that's OK, because it can be really hard to beat teams that are rock solid and consistent in the rugby equivalent of "blocking and tackling".


But this is why the performance against NZ is hard to defend. You can forgive a conservative, back-to-basics team for failing to score tons of tries, because teams like that make up for it with reliability in the simple things. They can defend well, apply territorial pressure, win the set piece battles, and take their scoring chances with metronomic goal kicking, maul tries and pick-and-go goal line attacks.


The reason why the English rugby administrators should be on high alert is not that the English team looked unable to score tries, but that they were repeatedly unable to close out a game by executing basic, coachable skills. Regardless of how they got to the point of being in control of their destiny, they did get to that point. All that was needed was to be world class at things that require more training than talent. But that training was apparently missing, and the finger has to point at the coach.


Borthwick has been in the job for nearly two years, a period that includes two 6N programs and an RWC campaign. So where are the solid foundations that he has been building?

4 Go to comments
N
Nickers 11 minutes ago
Scott Robertson responds to criticism over All Blacks' handling errors

Very poor understanding of what's going on and 0 ability to read. When I say playing behind the gain line you take this to mean all off-loads and site times we are playing in front of the gain line???


Every time we play a lot of rugby behind the gain line (for clarity, meaning trying to build an attack and use width without front foot ball 5m+ behind the most recent breakdown) we go backwards and turn the ball over in some way. Every time a player is tackled behind the most recent breakdown you need more and more people to clear out because your forwards have to go back around the corner, whereas opposition players can keep moving forward. Eventually you run out of either players to clear out or players to pass to and the result in a big net loss of territory and often a turnover. You may have witnessed that 20+ times in the game against England. This is a particularly dumb idea inside your own 40m which is where, for some reason, we are most likely to employ it.


The very best ABs teams never built an identity around attacking from poor positions. The DC era team was known for being the team that kicked the most. To engineer field position and apply pressure, and create broken play to counter attack. This current team is not differentiating between when a defence has lost it's structure and there are opportunities, and when they are completely set and there is nothing on. The reason they are going for 30 minute + periods in every game without scoring a single point, even against Japan and a poor Australian team, is because they are playing most of their rugby on the back foot in the wrong half.

43 Go to comments
N
Nickers 40 minutes ago
Scott Robertson responds to criticism over All Blacks' handling errors

I thought we made a lot of progress against that type of defence by the WC last year. Lots of direct running and punching holes rather than using width. Against that type of defence I think you have to be looking to kick on first phase when you have front foot ball which we did relatively successfully. We are playing a lot of rugby behind the gain line at the moment. They are looking for those little interchanges for soft shoulders and fast ball or off loads but it regularly turns into them battering away with slow ball and going backwards, then putting in a very rushed kick under huge pressure.


JB brought that dimension when he first moved into 12 a couple of years ago but he's definitely not been at his best this year. I don't know if it is because he is being asked to play a narrow role, or carrying a niggle or two, but he does not look confident to me. He had that clean break on the weekend and stood there like he was a prop who found himself in open space and didn't know what to do with the ball. He is still a good first phase ball carrier though, they use him a lot off the line out to set up fast clean ball, but I don't think anyone is particularly clear on what they are supposed to do at that point. He was used really successfully as a second playmaker last year but I don't think he's been at that role once this year. He is a triple threat player but playing a very 1 dimensional role at the moment. He and Reiko have been absolutely rock solid on defence which is why I don't think there will be too much experimentation or changes there.

43 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ England need to face a few home truths if they are to relearn that winning habit England need to face a few home truths if they are to relearn that winning habit
Search