Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

'The protocols are clearly not working' - SANZAR request TMO overhaul after spate of howlers

SANZAAR Chief Executive Officer Andy Marinos admits that current Television Match Official system is not working – report Rugby 365.

ADVERTISEMENT

There have been many controversial refereeing incidents and inconsistencies in Super Rugby this year.

The involvement of TMO’s in decisions during games has also been a major talking point throughout the season.

“At the conclusion of each season SANZAAR conducts a thorough review of its competitions and looks to continually enhance and improve the product for its stakeholders,” said a statement from SANZAAR.

“The past four weeks of international and domestic rugby have highlighted some challenges within the match officiating processes in the game of rugby, in particular, the events over the past two weeks of Super Rugby.”

Video Spacer

In the statement, Marinos said the TMO’s involvement in matches needs to be on the periphery.

“Match officiating is a very important component of our game that undergoes continuous review to keep abreast of law changes and specific directives passed down from World Rugby. The performances of the guys in the middle and those on the sidelines, and behind the TV monitor, are regularly reviewed and appraised to ensure the best referees and officials are officiating in Super Rugby matches.”

“Like a player, match officials who consistently do not perform to the level required are stood down from time to time, with specific game related work then done to get them back to performing consistently.

ADVERTISEMENT

“A major concern for us at present is the practical implementation of the Television Match Official (TMO) protocols. The protocols are clearly not working and a specific review is required in this area.

“SANZAAR believes the appointed referee needs to remain the key decision maker on the field and that TMO interventions only provide context to the match officials’ decision making. We need better consistency in the application of the protocols and most would agree that perhaps this is not the case. The aim of the review will be to drive some operational changes to the protocols to ensure this consistency so that better outcomes are delivered.

“SANZAAR is not empowered to adjust any protocols that have a direct affect on the Laws of the Game. However, we are keen to lead the discussion in this important area and following our review we will take our recommendations to World Rugby, the guardians of the Laws of Rugby, to ensure beneficial outcomes are achieved for the game.

“In terms of the Super Rugby finals SANZAAR will shortly appoint the four referees for the Super Rugby quarter-finals. These will be merit-based appointments and their selection has included direct input from the Super Rugby head coaches.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Source: @rugby365com

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Fresh Starts | Episode 2 | Sam Whitelock

Royal Navy Men v Royal Air Force Men | Full Match Replay

Royal Navy Women v Royal Air Force Women | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 9 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

24 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE Makazole Mapimpi: 'My life is somewhere I never thought it would be.' Makazole Mapimpi: 'My life is somewhere I never thought it would be.'
Search