TV review system under spotlight after ruling out Bassett try

[Rossm]

Piece in The Guardian's talking points from the Premiership’s weekend action.

If the aim of the television review system is to clarify and minimise error, decisions should be made based on the clear and the obvious, both in awarding a try and in ruling one out. Josh Bassett looked to have scored one of the tries of the Premiership campaign at the end of the first half of Bath’s win against Wasps, a flowing move that started from deep with forwards and backs – Joe Launchbury was involved twice – offloading with abandon before Gaby Lovobalavu, the Fijian centre who provided most of the opening period’s highlights, supplied the scoring pass. The try was reviewed and ruled out on the grounds that the pass had been made with a forward movement of the hands, although none of the replays appeared to confirm that. The television commentary team were unanimous that the pass complied with the rules, the pitch markings supporting their view. Yet there was not a review of Bath’s first try which followed a lineout that did not quite appear to satisfy the definition of a straight throw? There was more confusion than clarity, again.

[BG]

I noticed the same piece.

Is the television review system, governed by World Rugby guidelines or is it on a league by league basis?

My hunch is that World Rugby is only concerned with interpretations of laws and how they are applied and not the process of how the ref gets there be that on his own or with TMO help doesn't concern World Rugby

I've not watched test cricket for ages but I got the impression (when I have watched it) the 3rd umpire almost has a typed out flow chart of criteria when coming to a decision as to whether a batsman is out or not.

1st question is - Is it a "no ball" - If yes.. not out, if no, move onto the next question, did the ball land in line of the stumps.. etc  etc

Whereas the rugby based version has a lot more grey areas. Sometimes the wording of the ref can lead to a decision, sometimes TMO's are giving opinions even during play when they aren't even prompted.

TMO has a place in rugby (foul play, grounding for a try) but there needs to be much stricter guidelines as to what they should be giving their opinion on and when.

BTW.. Did anyone else think Bath's last try was a double movement? Why wasn't that picked up but a dubious foward pass was??

[Neils]

Yes the last try was but not reviewed.

[InBetweenWasp]

Yep, Mercer’s try a double movement, (no different to Hughes’ disallowed try against Chiefs I think?) for me and as beautifully champagne-flowing rugby as Josh’s try was, for me,

I can accept it being a forward pass.

I’d rather the press focussed on encouraging the right sort of questions (ie Alo’s try vs Tigers)

[Brandnewtorugby]

For me it isn't so much the decisions as much as the varying scrutiny. Perhaps it is the effect of supporting the losing team, but so often this year it has felt like Wasps are scrutinised more than other teams. If you want to find a reason not to award a try, if you look thoroughly enough you will often be able to find something marginal to dwell on. 

[mike909]

Bassett try

This video is worth looking at -especially the third example, which is a real visual surprise!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

Looking back, Healy is wrong - its not the markings on the pitch re the ball...however, watching in slo mo - Gaby is moving forwards when he passes the ball, even though baulked, he remains ahead of Bassett and the point where the ball is caught by Bassett, so whilst (per the video) it's likely the ball moved towards the Bath line relative to the line across the pitch - that does not rule the pass out as forwards - as Gaby's forward motion will have been transferred to the ball.

[AKWasp]

Bassett try

Looking back, Healy is wrong - its not the markings on the pitch re the ball...however, watching in slo mo - Gaby is moving forwards when he passes the ball, even though baulked, he remains ahead of Bassett and the point where the ball is caught by Bassett, so whilst (per the video) it's likely the ball moved towards the Bath line relative to the line across the pitch - that does not rule the pass out as forwards - as Gaby's forward motion will have been transferred to the ball.

I think Healey was still making a fair point: if the ball looked flat based on the pitch markings *without* taking into account Gaby’s forward momentum, then surely the pass was good?

[mike909]

Ok - I interpreted his view that the pass looked flat according to comparison with the pitch markings - I could easily be wrong!

My point - Gaby was always ahead of where Bassett caught the ball (even when reaching forwards) suggesting per the video, the pass was ok.

[AKWasp]

We’re both preaching the same thing! I’d agree that Healy probably meant the pass was flat due to the pitch lines in isolation. I think the combination of both our points would add to the argument that the pass was much more backwards than the TV initially showed.

[mike909]

Always nice to agree!

Mine's a cider....

[westwaleswasp]

That better be a real cider...... 

[mike909]

That better be a real cider...... 

Well, it will be tomorrow at the Apple on Bristol harbour!

I have a number of farms I buy from direct - which is nice at usually less than £1 a pint!