Coach's Challenge

[RBB]

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/exclusive-bring-in-nfl-style-coachs-challenge-is-the-call-from-top-english-club-chiefs/

When Wasps were beaten 28-22 at home by Harlequins last month, a possible game winning try opportunity was lost when Elia Elia, the Quins hooker emerged from the maul with the ball to clear the danger with just two minutes remaining. Anger at the time could not influence the decision which RugbyPass understands was later seen as a mistake and should have been a penalty try and yellow card. If a coach’s challenge had been in place, Wasps would have called for a ruling at that time with the help of the TMO.

Interesting idea and perhaps one I would support, first time I have read that the Elia Elia rip from the maul vs. Harlequins was actually viewed as a mistake.

[wasps]

I doubt that a coaches challenge would have made a difference with 2 minutes remaining.

There's so many incidents at every breakdown that could be reviewed and so many that are open to interpretation that the chances of still having a challenge available to use with 2 minutes remaining is unlikely

[Brandnewtorugby]

Last season we suffered from every try being scrutinised for a reason not to award it. There will always be errors and disagreements. If this comes in then I think something else should be removed. For example, if this came in as one per game, then TMO be reduced to being used just for specific things the referee thinks were close, eg. was a particular pass forward, ball grounded or player in touch. Getting rid of open questions like 'any reason I cannot award the try'.

[Tervueren]

What else in that match might have been debatable? Probably quite a few calls. Much as I would love us to have had 4 or 5 points, Quins won that match by being better for more of the match. As we (as I am confident we will) keep improving then odd decisions here and there will be less key to the result. I would rather they work on improving the rules we have and their implementation then start introducing what sounds like a bit of a gimmick.

[BG]

I wouldn't be a fan of having another way to pause the game. Its bad enough as it is now.

I do feel that some TMO's are in the ref's ear way too much as well, almost giving a running commentary or advising the ref to have a word with a prop before the next scrum because of his bind. s that really what the TMO is for?

Also, have refs ditched the "Try yes or no" or "Is there any reason I can't award a try"?

I've noticed now they say "my on field decision is xxx .. can you check please" (or something along those lines)

[Heathen]

The one that Alo had disallowed v Tigers was one of the worst calls I have ever seen! Clearly well over the line but hidden by the player's mass, with no opposition player anywhere near it.

[Tervueren]

The one that Alo had disallowed v Tigers was one of the worst calls I have ever seen! Clearly well over the line but hidden by the player's mass, with no opposition player anywhere near it.

Might outlawing JP Doyle be the resolution rather than adding further overheads to the play?

[Neils]

The one that Alo had disallowed v Tigers was one of the worst calls I have ever seen! Clearly well over the line but hidden by the player's mass, with no opposition player anywhere near it.

Might outlawing JP Doyle be the resolution rather than adding further overheads to the play?

Oh Yes Please

[Peej]

It was a shocking call on the Elia Elia "rip" - hopefully the referee feedback system made that very obvious

[BG]

The one that Alo had disallowed v Tigers was one of the worst calls I have ever seen! Clearly well over the line but hidden by the player's mass, with no opposition player anywhere near it.

Might outlawing JP Doyle be the resolution rather than adding further overheads to the play?

Oh Yes Please

+2

[RBB]

The one that Alo had disallowed v Tigers was one of the worst calls I have ever seen! Clearly well over the line but hidden by the player's mass, with no opposition player anywhere near it.

Might outlawing JP Doyle be the resolution rather than adding further overheads to the play?

Surely someone needs to take JPD to one side and ask him nicely to hang up his whistle?

[BG]

Can ref's actually be sacked (contract terminated)?

I presume ref's are registered/licensed by the RFU and then PRL contracts who they would like on a season by season basis.

There was a ref (high profile) that was sacked by a governing body.. he was either Ozzie or NZ and was sacked by his RFU.. and then registered with one of either the other RFU.

[Tervueren]

Can ref's actually be sacked (contract terminated)?

I presume ref's are registered/licensed by the RFU and then PRL contracts who they would like on a season by season basis.

There was a ref (high profile) that was sacked by a governing body.. he was either Ozzie or NZ and was sacked by his RFU.. and then registered with one of either the other RFU.

Steve Walsh?

[wasps]

As I said above, I don't think that a coaches challenge would have made any difference in the Quins game.

However, I'm not entirely against the idea of each team having a number of challenges that they can use throughout the game, but there's gotta be some changes to the existing use of the TMO and how the challenges could be used.
Ultimately though, the more i think about the idea of Challenges, the more i think it will cause more trouble than it's worth.


I think it's fair to use the TMO for checking scores (i.e. is it a try, did the kick actually go through the posts), and for foul play.
However, maybe the TMO should only be allowed to intervene off his own back to check for foul play (I believe that was the initial rule)


Anything else is up to the teams to challenge.
You'd almost certainly end up with tactical challenges where a team are under pressure so the coach challenges just to get a break in play and let his players have a rest.... that would be bad, but would definitely happen.

The idea of letting play continue until the next stoppage before reviewing a challenge also isn't ideal, because that could easily be a few minutes, maybe even 5 minutes.... and that seems too far to rewind to review a challenge for what could be an illegal rip at a ruck, or an offside, knock on etc.


It seems like a total minefield.
Instead, as others have said, get the existing rules correct before trying to fuck things up again

[Lwasp]

Would a challenge have changed that result? If the on field referee has to adjudicate on the challenge will he over turn his own decision? In the example given it suggests that after the fact it has been decided a wrong decision was made, it doesn't make clear who has decided the decision was wrong.

I think this would only work in a cricket referral style. The on field umpire gives a decision, but the review is handled by the 3rd umpire who just tells the on field what the result is. This is how I think the TMO should work anyway, they should watch the footage and tell Sir what the result is, not show Sir on the big screen what he should have seen first time.