Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

World Rugby to trial new Laws that could fundamentally change how the TMO is used

Will England miss Robshaw's experience out in Japan? (Getty Images)

Referee’s having ‘on the run’ chats with the TMO could become a thing of the past if new trial Laws are adopted.

ADVERTISEMENT

World Rugby have approved a closed trial revising the scope of the Television Match Official (TMO) in the November tests hosted by Tier one unions.

Confirmation of the trial comes after a full review of the current global trial and the variant used in Super Rugby by a working group of match officials, coaches, players and administrators, reflecting the sport’s commitment to ensuring best-possible match officiating practice.

The key objective of the review was to look at current practice with a view to further reduce TMO reliance and time impact, while ensuring clear, consistent and accurate on-field decision-making.

Continue reading below…

Video Spacer

The following principles were agreed following detailed consideration:

Try scoring should be an on-field decision with the referee being responsible, but the team of four can all contribute.

The current list of potential infringements for which a TMO can be referred will be retained, but any referral needs to be prompt, clear and consistent.

The ‘on the run’ chat between the match officials and TMO for foul play will be removed with the onus on the referee, who should only refer to the TMO issues that are clear and obvious serious acts of foul play, including penalty kick, yellow card or red card as a potential sanction in order to protect player welfare.

ADVERTISEMENT

Match officials can review foul play up to when the game restarts, when a penalty is kicked to touch and when foul play footage becomes available.

Proposal to include live broadcast of the TMO in action.

World Rugby Chairman Bill Beaumont said: “World Rugby is committed to regularly reviewing our match officiating protocols to ensure that they are in the best-possible shape to support accurate and consistent match official decision-making and uphold our player welfare focus without adversely impacting on the match.

“This Television Match Official review reflects that commitment and I would like to thank everyone who participated in the process and look forward to seeing the trial in practice this November.”

ADVERTISEMENT

World Rugby Council Member and Rugby Committee Chairman John Jeffrey added: “In reviewing the current global protocol alongside the Super Rugby protocol, the group agreed that for this trial we should place greater emphasis on on-field decision-making, with the TMO role limited to try-scoring and serious foul play, while also removing the ‘on-the-run’ conversations between the TMO and team of three match officials.

“While we hope that the revised protocol will have a positive impact in terms of time impact on the game and accuracy, as with any trial, we will undertake a full review after the November window before determining whether to proceed.”

World Rugby has also issued a law application guideline reinforcing current law for match officials in relation to high tackles and neck contact. Click here to view.

As announced last week, an amendment to Law 9 (9.26) has been introduced with immediate effect relating to lowering players to ground safely in open play. Click here to view.

Working group members: John Jeffrey (Chair), Brett Gosper (World Rugby CEO), Brett Robinson (Rugby Australia/World Rugby Rugby Committee Member), Alain Rolland (World Rugby High Performance 15s Match Officials Manager) Ben Skeen (TMO, NZR), Lyndon Bray (SANZAAR Match Officials Manager), Nigel Owens (Referee, WRU), Joe Schmidt (Coach, IRFU), Jamie Heaslip (International Rugby Players), Steve Jamieson (World Rugby TV Producer/Broadcast), Rowan Kitt (TMO, RFU), Angus Gardiner (Referee, NZR), Ian Foster (Coach NZR),, Mark Egan (World Rugby Head of Competitions and Performance) and Mark Harrington (World Rugby Head of Technical Services).

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

Boks Office | Episode 37 | Six Nations Round 4 Review

Cape Town | Leg 2 | Day 2 | HSBC Challenger Series 2025 | Full Day Replay

Gloucester-Hartpury vs Bristol Bears | PWR 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 36 | Six Nations Round 3 Review

Why did Scotland's Finn Russell take the crucial kick from the wrong place? | Whistle Watch

England A vs Ireland A | Full Match Replay

Kubota Spears vs Shizuoka BlueRevs | JRLO 2024/2025 | Full Match Replay

Watch now: Lomu - The Lost Tapes

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

P
Poorfour 1 hour ago
Antoine Dupont undergoes surgery on injured knee ahead of long absence

So “it wasn’t foul play because it wasn’t foul play” is - to you - not only an acceptable answer but the only possible answer?


I would hope that the definition of foul play is clear enough that they can say “that wasn’t foul play - even though it resulted in a serious injury - because although player A did not wrap with the right arm, he entered the ruck through the gate and from a legal angle at a legal height, and was supporting his own weight until player B entered the ruck behind him and pushed him onto player C’s leg” or “that wasn’t foul play although players D and E picked player F out of a ruck, tipped him upside down and dropped him on his shoulder because reasons.”


Referees sometimes offer a clear explanation, especially when in discussion with the TMO, but they don’t always, especially for incidents that aren’t reviewed on field. It’s also a recognised flaw in the bunker system that there isn’t an explanation of the card decisions - I’d personally prefer the bunker to prepare a short package of the best angles and play back to the ref their reasoning, with the ref having the final say, like an enhanced TMO. It would cost a few more seconds, but would help the crowd to understand.


Greater clarity carries with it risks - not least that if the subsequent feedback is at odds with the ref’s decision they run the risk of harassment on social media - but rugby is really struggling to show that it can manage these decisions consistently, and offering a clear explanation after the fact would help to ensure better consistency in officiating in future.

9 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Sky Sports commentator on why Wallabies players are outplaying All Blacks counterparts Sky commentator on why Wallabies players are outplaying All Blacks
Search