A Weekend of Major TMO Calls | Whistle Watch
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- After a thrilling weekend of test action, Nigel Owens is back to cast an eye over everything that went down.
Nigel takes a look at the biggest talking points from South Africa v Ireland, Argentina v France and Australia v Wales.
One of the key focuses was should James Lowe's try have been allowed to stand against South Africa, and the place of the TMO in the decision. And then there was Lowe at the centre of the action again ahead of Cheslin Kolbe's try. Owens reflects on the difficult decisions for the TMO within both passages.
The iconic match official also takes your Emirates' Fan Questions.
#Rugby #Review #WhistleWatch #Referee
SUBSCRIBE to World Rugby on RUclips!
Keep up-to-date on all things rugby by following World Rugby on social
media @WorldRugby 
Спорт
![MORTAL KOMBAT 1 - KOMBAT PACK 2 REVEAL TRAILER!! [REACTION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Mi2M58zEQVc/mqdefault.jpg)
The other thing I would bring up was the neck rolls in The Ireland SA game. It was policed pretty hard in England V ABs but not so much in SA
The ref never bothered to ref rucks in that game. So can’t penalise one side all of a sudden for a neck roll when you’ve been letting 29 of them slide from both sides. Same thing with illegally playing the ball in the ruck and same thing for sealing off and same thing for playing the 9 like snyman did coming in from the side. So as a ref I always set my rules from the start and I will le Lize early so you know that won’t fly. That ref didn’t do that, he acted as there were no rules to rucks and invited chaos, so now it’s halfway through the game, rucks are beyond chaos but you can’t all of a sudden start penalising left and right without looking like the weekend’s idiot doing so now you stuck with a mess. Didn’t watch the whole game cause I fell asleep but nz vs ent ref was much more on point setting the pace in the start and hence why he had a much easier time preventing chaos.
@@dreammaker9642 If that "coming in from the side" instance is the one I am thinking of, the ruck hadn't formed yet. You need at least one player from either side on their feet for a ruck. Three Irish players don't constitute a ruck. As for the neck rolls, I've seen lots of complaints but they weren't neck rolls. Putting your arm over a shoulder in the ruck doesn't by itself constitute a neck roll.
@@Ollies2CentsWardill thank you. Someone in this comment section understands.. i was starting to lose my mind
@@Ollies2CentsWardill good assessment 👏
@@Ollies2CentsWardill oh buddy nope that ain’t how it works. Even if it ain’t a ruck you have to come through the gate doesn’t matter if no one is there if you don’t it’s off side or from the side whichever you prefer. Only person who doesn’t have to is tackler if he gets up and releases unless they’ve changed that cause I don’t see as many doing it but I was a pro at that and even then you usually still ended up through the gate. Now if a player is laying flat perpendicular to you the gate is huge so technically you could come from the side but coming straight from the side to get the ball is a no no.
Luke Pearse is an absolute muppet, He wants to make the game all about him. Needless to say he had a shocker last weekend. Holly Davidson is by far the best referee at the moment, Just wish she would get more games.
I think Andrea Piardi is the best ref out there. He did the Bulls v Glasgow game and was immaculate. Holly Davidsons is great ref but I think he weak link is the scrum🙂
And yes Pearce has gone shocking, he doesn’t cope with big games well at all.
So Luke Pearce had a shocker, you say?
Now obviously you say this as someone who has vast experience and expertise in rugby, surely? Are you a former player? How many tests have you played? Or maybe you are a referee? If you have experience at test level, surely you are entitled to make such a claim.
I mean, I'm assuming you have test level experience because, because saying what you did while not having played rugby since your school days would be stupid, right?
lmfao holly who ? go back to your soy lattes princess you know sweet f.a. about rugby the same as that bird your simping over. give you a signed picture for your collection did she lols.
Yeah he's trying to become the next Nigel. Is also very arrogant and harder approach kind of like Wayne Barnes I thought things with referee would take up as soon as Wayne Barnes retired unfortunately not.
I agree with Nigel, Ireland were robbed. I hope my Bokke can win more convincingly this weekend 🇿🇦
We definitely felt hard done by with a few decisions. Some bad mistakes by Ireland didn't help their cause.
Ben Whitehouse is making a habit of re-refereeing games from the booth. Did so throughout the WC too. Someone needs to have a word with him. We shouldn't remember who the tmo was for key games like this
They talk about speeding the game up but have TMOs intervening at every opportunity. They're ruining the game.
That is blatantly not true. You're being hyperbolic. If they don't wan't the TMO's to check for foul play then make foul play legal.
@@Bobbydylandyeah. Then making it legal would ruin the game
@@awsomerobyn2603 I agree, but don't be upset with the ref for calling it out. It's not their fault.
Can you imagine blaming the police for all the crimes they dealing with? Lol.
Real
@@Bobbydyland of course. I agree that you shouldn’t go after a ref or anything.
Like I can understand having a discussion about it but I would say that it is what it is. You can’t change what happened and refs are just humans who make mistakes as well
Spot on as usual. In relation to Ireland SA I doubt those decisions would have been made if the was played anywhere outside South Africa. I really could not believe he was disallowing the Lowe try, the best of the weekend.
Have faith in the officials. That's what you told us Saffas when the referees did that to us when playing at the Aviva. 😊
The Lowe try? There we so many infringements before that try from Ireland at the breakdown. Hold that. Why are you praying for a try from illegal play to be awarded?
@@jadenphilander8799 There werent though were there, it was a fantastic try, disallowed by a ref because he was trying to get SA over the line at home.
@@fallschirmjager0000 Listen tok what Jaco Peyper said.
if you have to watch something more than once maybe twice at most (minus a bad camera angle) then it’s blatantly not clear and obvious.
Now if anyone wishes to discuss is that rule correct I am all ears, but under the current rules it seems bizarre that we have replays shown 10 times and take multiple minutes and then we get told that something is clear and obvious.
Did anyone notice a strange situation during the weekend with Springbok vs Ireland, All Blacks v England and Australia vs Wales. Everyone of the kickers missed a very easy conversion or penalty right in from of the posts.
yes shocking for those teams that have had many games this year. Not so bad for the teams just getting started this year but still not good.
Pollard didn’t miss right in front of the poles idk where you were that game 😂 I mean he missed easy kicks for his standard but the average kicker would be very glad to get that over in test match conditions
@@dreammaker9642typical topical typical
@@jason.stevens might as well have added tropical in there would make as much sense as whatever you are saying but with a pinch ore fun lmao
England would have won with a better kicker.
@ Nigel, I have a question about playing the ball on the ground?
How long does a player have to place, hold or pass the ball when he is on the ground. Before it's deemed playing the ball on the ground?
For example - you see this often - A Player is tackled, he is on the ground and rolls/twists backwards then holds up the ball with one or two hands until the N9 takes it off him and passes it. Or they wait until a player is close and pop it up to them.
How long does he have before its called playing the ball on the ground?
This is why Nigel Owens the GOAT. He follows the rules but also respects the occasion. I was rooting for the boks but that James Lowe try should've been disallowed. TMOs are ruining the game.
Wrong.
At that ruck, the ref was calling Irish hands off the ball then suddenly it pops out on the Irish side and Lowe scores. That should have immediately been sent up to the TMO to ask how a South Africa ball somehow came out the Irish side without a counter-ruck.
In all honesty, the refs job isn't to coach the players, so when he saw Irish hands in the ruck he should have immediately signalled advantage to South Africa, not given the players a free pass.
The way I see the James Louw touch or no touch incident is that if no try was scored no one would have gone to check if he was out or not and play would have continued. Therefore the refs on field decision was try.
Bullshiter
Mr Owens called out Whitehouse for not allowing Lowe try.
It was a case of looking for a reason to not allow a try.
And there was a reason. They just missed the real reason. Bundee Aki was not supporting his own weight in the attemp to steal the ball. That should've been a penalty for SA
@@clarke1319 Agreed. This is the problem with rugby. They dont know whats going on. Yet it was not to check if its a try. The try was already awarded. It was to find a reason not to award the try. So the needed concrete proof of the ball out of play. There was none.
@@M0RR1S10 He is clearly on his feet and is being held up by his team mate. So the first penalty should be against Kriel for not releasing the ball if you want to be picky.
The point is however the reason the try was disallowed is not clear and obvious. It happens directly in front of the referee who has a clear line of sight. These sort of incidents can happen at any time and do throughout any rugby match. They only become an issue when the TMO reviews a try. If Lowe had bee tackled a metre short of the line into touch it would not have mattered.
It's just another example of the game being refereed to the minutest detail by the guy in the dungeon watching a TV screen.
@@M0RR1S10Aki was legal until he was pulled forwards (illegal) by the SA defender. That is collapsing a ruck and is punishable by a penalty. So the reason you pulled from your backside to justify chalking off a perfectly good try is also wrong. Well done.
First time that he says the tmo and ref made a mistake? Previous 50/50 calls he would talk around it. Just me?
he is prej against RSA the call was technically correct.
That call on the James Lowe try is 50/50, but there were a couple of infringements around that same ruck that could've chalked off that try.
… correct.
But the his reasoning is clear - he believes all of a TMO’s influence must rule against the Springboks.
Typical.
But I guess, he will (hypocritically) change his tune in the near future.
It is a common trait with N.Hemispheric officials.
Not 50/50 calls 👀
do you not understand English.
Fair enough if you don't
@@TheMarketSniper🤡
Well done nigel! 👏 lowes try should have stood. Just very poor from the tmo.
Hi. The question regarding the Low quick throw in. He was trying to prevent a SA lineout throw as it was from a penalty kick
Yes I was going to make that point. You wouldn't make that much effort to keep it out of touch if it was going to be your throw anyway (quick or otherwise).
SA didn't make the rugby rules. SA didn't blow the wistle. SA was constantly on the wrong side of 50/50 calls for YEARS, and you all enjoyed the advantage to your teams. Rassie was even banned for asking questions about referee consistency. You all rejoiced his ban.
Rassie decided to accept poor referee decisions because everyone had a problem with his complaints.
Question: Why are YOU suddenly complaining about referee decisions? Or, do you have one set of rules for SA, and one for the rest??
The south africans have never lost a fair rugby match in the modern game. /s
@@barrymoran9657Exactly
Don’t worry about it the Irish aren’t blaming SA they can only play their game and no one can change the result, overall on play SA deserved to win and the Irish know this, but referees should be severely reprimanded and lose their standings for rubbish like this , so many teams fans etc invest hugely in games like this test to be let down by rubbish decisions from in this case highly thought of referee . I do not think he should get away without explaining why he made such bad decisions.
SA got a load of home town decisions so clearly the bias was for SA . That shows there's no bias against SA . If SA got the decisions Ireland got in the game there would have been ructions.
@@davidwalker2402 The approach should be questioning TMO competency in general. TMO's should be professional referees and not some faceless unknown alien. Do they even know rugby laws?
Bad decisions just spoil the game of rugby.
9:29 - I think this answer may have missed the point. Suppose Lowe had caught the ball over the touchline, in which case it would have been a lineout to Ireland since he hadn't carried it over. But he wasn't sure of his position when he caught the ball so he tried to throw it back into the field of play. This was allowed to stand because he was deemed *_not_* to have been in touch. But had he been in touch, the question being asked is: if this was going to be a lineout to Ireland wouldn't that have counted as Lowe trying to take a quick throw in? In which case, the try would still stand.
A small consolation for us Irish fans that felt fairly aggrieved by those calls by Pearce and Whitehouse.
On the Lowe “quick throw question”, he couldn’t take a quick throw as it was a penalty kick to touch.
love Nigel ones so much
The officiating in the Ireland game was shocking, but hey the rugby referees/tmo's rarely get stepped down. Simply not good enough at this level!!
The Frence Ref for the Wales and Australian game had a good game and ref the game correctly.
With regards to the first question about more points for how the try is scored, in university level rugby in South Africa the try gives more points the further away from the tryline a turnover takes place to promote more ball in hand rugby and discourages kicking the ball away. Leads to some very exciting rugby 👌🏻
Ya if a possession starts in your own 22 and run the field it was 7 point try plus 2 for the conversion
Love your knowledge Nigel 🔥
IMO Luke Pearce and his team were not up to the "big" match. LP was under stress from kick off and it even reflected in his voice. I would say the big mistake was putting the group together - ok to use them in a mix with more solid officials. Plenty questions asked about these guys in the past - but obviously ignored.
Nigel can you address all those penalties against Ireland in match two aswell.Particularly when they ref awarded a penalty which Pollard kicked for points against C.blade .The ref said Blade touched the ball when jumping up causing offside position.However it was a South African player that clearly touched and knocked the ball on.Blade clearly did not touch the ball.The assistant ref told the ref that the Irish player was onside.Why didn’t the ref wait before the kick to check or rule out the kick?The ref clearly says on his mic it was onside.
Nigel, I've been getting confused lately on when a rolling maul becomes an obstruction? Why is it that when the attacking team breaks off the maul, retaining the position they had in the maul (i.e. ball carrier at the back) they can get pinged for obstruction? Would a defense strategy not be then to disengage and then tackle the newly formed "obstruction"?
I like this genuine independence from a former world class referee that always comes days after things have settled. I’m not liking former refs being trotted out by their pay masters to agree with decisions that benefit their current employer. The reason is because of what happens when similar decisions go the other way and the paid studge is sent out post match to say how the ref or TMO got things wrong while things are still raw. I see no good coming of it.
i used to think Luke Pearce was a great ref.tough job i know...but i think the big occasion gets to him.
Totally agree.
Not like the Matthew Carley though. He’s on another level of letting an occasion get to him.
Luke Pearce started off as a referee with great potential but his ego has now surpassed his credentials and he's been awful in big games constantly
I thought he had a meltdown on the scrum penalty try. Very trigger happy decision I thought. The ball had been kicked through to Irelands side of the scrum. You're stretching the bow quite long to conclude there was a probable try in those circumstances.
You irish? hahaha
Same. Used to rate him but Saturday has really discredited him. He was horrible to CD. Felt like 3rd class citizens on the titanic all over again.
If the SA vs Ire test were played in Ireland, no doubt they would've been awarded 2 more tries and we saw just that over the last tests how similar decisions did go Irelands' way so it seems very much 1 for 1 and if this test was tied then it would've come down to who had the best goal kicking which all teams struggled with last week. SA and Ire are very evenly matched teams and I also dont think the officiating will allow ao many things to slip come the next test in Durbs, I don't think Ireland will get away with their tricks in the scrums next week, it's just a pitty this is only 2 tests.
As for Lowe keeping the ball in field, this wouldn't have been a problem a few years ago if they hadn't changed the laws, as you had to land infield after touching the ball so a good example of how law changes have a knock on effect in the game and on the other hand, Lowe wouldn't have even attempted to keep the ball infield anyway.
Great insight
100% right on the James Lowe try. Thanks for confirming. Although irrelevant now I do hope the moody little 'hall monitor' of a person the ref is will be properly reviewed on it.
"Hall monitor"? Really? He let quite a bit go. Unfortunately not many referees put up with the gobby sh11te Sexton or his lippy successor dish out.
Like the last maul in the group stages 100% wrong call towards SA I call it pure justice!
@@oswaldhartzenberg6008they were told to play it and didn't do that in time. They'd gotten the ball back just in time don't know what the SA scrum half was at
@@jeffrey89095 so many players offside and sliding down the maul pure cheats that won nothing...
@@jeffrey89095That SA scrum half was pulled down by the Irish players at the breakdown, so he was prevented by playing the ball in the first place which is cynical and the Irish should have been penalized for that, and also penalty for Bundee Aki collapsing the maul.
I think the real issue here is that grey area, where the ref may say play on and the TMO says different. Neither being 100% certain of their decision. Does the TMO override the Ref then? Even though the TMO is unsure themselves.
In an answer to your question, I don’t think the TMO should be allowed to override the Ref as the TMO is (only) there to alert/advise the Ref should something have been ‘missed’ & obviously in response to a question initiated by the Ref but the final decision is made by the person with the whistle.
There was 1 game I remember when Nigel was officiating and after the TMO had alerted Nigel to a couple of instances to which Nigel obviously had to stop the game, review the instances on the big screen only to dismiss them both away as not an issue, Nigel told the TMO to stop interrupting and to let him rule the game without further interruptions. That was a thing of beauty…a sign what a good/strong Ref Nigel was.
As per Nigel’s response in this episode to a question about whether ALL TMO’s being Test quality Referees or not to which the answer was NO, I cannot see how the TMO can override the Ref. The TMO has obviously got the ability, due to time, technology & assistants, to review any incidents requested by the Ref and/or to monitor/identify any Foul Play etc that wasn’t seen by any of the On-Field Officials & can make the Ref aware of such i.e. Check, check, check… but the final decision & responsibility should always be made by the Ref. Without the Ref being shown compelling evidence on the ‘big screen’ (or little TV monitor on the sideline) which is what the spectator & viewer is also shown, the TMO should never be able to override the Ref by verbal advice only.
I get frustrated when the Ref blows their whistle to award a try but is still searching if they can see a grounding or not several seconds (or longer) later. If the Ref can’t see a grounding when the whistle was blown, to stop play, any subsequent sighting of a ‘grounding’ is after the whistle & could have simply occurred because the defender’s released the attacker/ball in reaction to the whistle allowing the attacker to subsequently ground but that grounding happened after the whistle.
Another ‘twist’ of that is when the attacker goes to ground the ball over the line but then has to fight, wiggle, twist & turn in the tackle to ground the ball. When does it change from a ‘single movement’ to being construed as a ‘second movement’ or an ‘extra roll’?
In the above 2 instances, perhaps a Law change, could/should be that a try has to be clearly grounded, physically & visible, in a single movement with the ball under total control at all times- no fluffy/subjective downward pressure of one finger or the elbow, funny bone etc - just total control & I would hope that ‘total control’ is specified to avoid any future subjective interpretations/discussions.
Another ’grey’ area for me is when the Ref asks ‘Try or no try’ which is when they are totally ‘reliant’ on the TMO/technology. If there is such doubt, should a try only be awarded if only 100 percent a try and disallowed if only 1 percent doubt or awarded if 51/49 percent respectively. Is the cup half full or half empty? When is it a try or not a try?
Could you explain in the Ireland - SA game:
Why is it a scrum for the Bokks when Cheslin Kolbe charged the ball down in the in goal area and knocked into in goal touch?
Because Lowe was the one that brought it into the in goal area (he touched it before it went over the line). That’s my understanding anyway!
@@OISIN3IRE if he layed it dead, yea. But he kicked it and then cheslin blocked it into touch... Why does the carrying it into in goal matter?
@@Luggagga I just think that’s the law but I’m not 100% sure.
@@OISIN3IRE could you quote which law and which paragraph? Cause I can't
@@Luggagga no I can’t, I was trying to find it
A foot in touch is a foot in touch, regardless of what the referee says. Ben W could see (from one angle) what we all seen; James Lowe's fingers had clear contact with the ball when his right foot was firmly in touch. So, the ball (in accordance with the laws of physics) the ball was dead. As an Irish supporter Nigel, I can understand how Welsh officials are still having problems refereeing decisions against Ireland down the touchline! 😉
Ben whitehouse is awful, how is he anywhere near test match level? He cost Scotland at the WC with an awful call against….. South Africa
MS question... I really enjoy your rugby insights, but am equally absorbed by the beauty and cleanliness and organisation of your farm. Do you have helpers, what is the history behind it, is it primarily a dairy farm, what difficulties do you face? How about a "spin-off" series (or an insert) about what's happening on the farm each week?
My first thought watching the SA/IRE game live was that Lowe did step out. But agree the way it transpired the correct call were made in that context. We (SA) need to be ready for the Durban test, IRE has nothing to lose really and probably will come out with everything.
What are your thoughts on Damien McKenzie's taking too long to kick when (looking at the playback) the call was made inside 60 seconds. Should have the TMO stepped in?
ohhh i didnt know it was under the 60s...tmo should have a look
60 seconds is an age to take a kick. Get on with it ffs. Also ludicrous the stadium hasn't a timer for the kicker. They're in most if not all stadiums in Europe now.
@@MattConnolly-wi8ohthere’s a reason kickers take as long as they can it’s called letting your team mates catch a breath, so now you know.
Damien "The Grinning Chipmunk" McKenzie
@@MattConnolly-wi8oh "Get on with it ffs" ....and if they do have a timer for the kicker then you can guarantee they wont get the f... on with it if it suits them not to.
We've already seen it. Kickers standing over the ball for an age whilst watching the timer count down.
How does world rugby not allow the clips to be shown? Rugby is in the dark ages when it comes to modern media
Nigel, you should be a TMO.
My take on the try scored under Penalty advantage is to allow the conversion to be optionally taken perpendicularly to where the try was scored or from any of the Penalty advantages ‘identified’. As Per what Nigel suggested, is to ensure that each of the Penalty advantages is validated if it is valid or not or rather not even involve the TMO as in reality, how often does the TMO intervene when a Penalty is awarded in open play anyway? Maybe only involve the TMO if there was a hint of foul play that may result in a Yellow. And if there was nothing wrong with the try but there is/was a hint of Foul play then allow the Kicker to attempt the conversion & then stop the clock to review the incident.
I miss Oom Nigel - still have massive respect for him
Why was there a penalty try awarded from the scrum the Boks had that they pushed over the try line?
The law states that: “A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts if foul play by the opposing team prevents a probable try from being scored, or scored in a more advantageous position. A player guilty of this must be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off. No conversion is attempted.” - was someone sent off? (I might have been too busy being amazed at the power of that pack to notice, but I don't think anyone was)
Yes he YCd the Irish hooker. Not sure why he drew the short stick. I've seen YCds not given for scrum penalty tries on the basis that it's difficult to single out one single player at fault.
Wrong law. There are many panaly try laws. You just picked one that didn't apply.
Hey Mate, there was actually a Yellow issued to Ireland No. 2
@@erickdavid2412 what?
@@jayvan1074 for collapsing the scrum that had basically become a maul and preventing the try?
Hi Nigel
Thanks for another great vid....
I have a question (and it really is a question).... I'm trying to understand your explanation of when the tmo should be used.... my logic leads me to think that when a referee can come to a clear decision on his own.... then no assistance is needed from the tmo.... but from your explanation I understand that if there is no clear evidence of what has taken place then the decision should be solely left to the referee.... but that doesn't make sense to me.... surely when there is no clear evidence of what has happened, wouldn't you want another set of eyes who can slow the play down and look at it from different angles? Maybe I just misunderstood you....
Thanks Again 👍🏻👍🏻
I’m not Nigel but I do see where he is coming from here is why. First of in this case tmo was right to step in cause it was clear and obvious, one aki should have let go of the ball when he went off his feet cause at that point he lost footing can’t play it. Second the player that knocked it out was on the ground he’s not allowed to do that. That is clear as day and tmo was correct to bring it back and that ref was useless at ruck time and that brings me to my point. What Nigel is saying is tmo shouldn’t make a habit of getting involved in the neatly greedy stuff that are rucks because same as scrums majority of the time both teams can be l’enlisement meaning you could argue both sides hence why lots of times experienced refs will let it slide unless there’s a clear infringement that gives a team an unfair advantage like a defender sealing off the ball so basically going straight off his feet blocking the ball. Can’t do that or a player diving in the ruck, dangerous can’t do that.
Now there are more tricky cases like your team mate didn’t roll away and is on the way but not enough for the ref to penalise but if now you or any other team may try steal the ball and get the penalty you in tern will be penalised because of the tackler not rolling and preventing the clean. So normally ref would have played on but now because you went for the ball you force his hand and he can’t reward you for a turn over if your tackler is on the way making it an unfair context.
Those are little things refs know and should know at least which in this case is the problem. This ref let everything fly on the rucks so tmo has to get involved. My guess is either ref doesn’t know the laws around the rucks or didn’t do a good job of asserting himself early one and dictate what flies and what doesn’t at ruck time which means he invite chaos and by the time the game is half way through he can’t penalise players for side entries, offsides or neck rolls cause his been letting it slide for the whole game so would be unfair and even more incompetent to remember there are laws 3/4 into the game.
So Nigel is right in the cases where refs are as competent and aware as he was but there’s none like that these days. Refs were always an issue and it’s normal but where as before it was controversy so refs making tough call these days it’s pure incompetence of refs looking right at infringements and saying nothing. So either WR needs to invest in prescription lens for all officials or they should bother training them properly
@@dreammaker9642There is some contention in that though. Aki does release the ball when off his feet, but for the "illegal knock back" by Kellegher he was initially entitled to ruck the ball as his came though from a proper position. However due to him being neck rolled (that itself should have been a penalty) across the ruck he ended up knocking it back. It's not conclusive to be intentional.
Outside of Nigel's view of letting play continue, the ref could have brought it back as an Irish penalty with no advantage due to playing the ball when off feet.
@@popplerJOE nope Aki held on to the ball still and after tried releasing to his side which he couldn’t cause there was someone hence why it was just sitting there. He can’t do that and I know for a fact cause I’ve been penalized a bunch for doing that, you have to be on your feet to scoop it. The second even if it’s a neck roll other dude lost his footing a played the ball. End of the day you still can’t award a try but it should have been a pen to Ireland.
@dreammaker9642 you refung Saturday? 👀 🤣
@@FreePalestine-q1s can you translate your question to English ? Genuinely have no clue what you on about rn
Mr N Owens is a legend.
There is clear movement in Lowes shorts once the ball touches his leg. He was in touch. Tom Foley should be sacked
Kelleher who the penalty was given against was at the time completely neck rolled face down into to ruck. That's a stone wall yellow, player safety etc. There is one camera angle you can find that shows it clearly. The ref listening to TMO without a second review gave the penalty against him when the ball hit the back of his heel. For such a huge call in games very often with tiny margins to not do due diligence and double check all the angles was negligent. Then ireland give a soft try from the penalty and it was like a 12-14 point swing.
For next episode, during the U20 game between France and NZ, a techical yellow to a French player was given after a foul play that ended up as a yellow then red after a review. Why wasn't the French yellow card rescinded?
Feels like the TMO needed to go back to a ruck with 5 penalties and find the one to rule out the try
Why can't the ref ask a second question to the tmo?
Refs inevitably make mistakes. It often seems odd to me that the TMO is expected to have a better view of what happened than the ref who is right there.
TMOs travel in time.....
Well, the reason the TMO interfered with the Lowe try was because the ball suddenly popped up on Ireland's side of the ruck after South Africa took it in. It looked fishy to me and made no sense when I saw it live. Ireland is known for their antics at the rucks.
Watching the replay again, the ref sounds like first hes asking was it not knocked on my Aki, the TMO then says to check for the on the ground knock back. Aki tried to get the ball but doesn't stay on his feet and looses an attempt at the ball no clear knock on. Kellher comes and tries to ruck over and Willie is pulled over by the other Irish player who then pulls Kellher by the neck. His knee hits the ball the. He kicks it back.
Ireland is known for their antics at the ruck? 😆
Every top team worth their salt is known fror their antics at ruck, maul, lineout, scrum. At International level you play right to the very edge of the laws.....
You should listen to what the expert said about that, not your intererpetation of it
that was his interpretation as well
Not the opinion of Nigel Owens
ref ruined the first game for Ireland, all the big calls went the way of SA. Ireland should have won the series overall.
Great analysis but wat this shows is the TMOs are still not staying within the guidelines as occurred in the WC and are having far to much influence on outcomes. They really need to be told to pull their heads in and demoted if they dont.
Nigel talks about a yellow card for cynical play in the Argentina-France match. I've just watched the NZ-France U20 semi-final where this happened: ref misses blatant head contact by a NZ tackler on the French no. 9; play continues; French player cynically offside stops a NZ attack and gets yellow carded; while this is happening, the TMO calls the ref back to the head contact; NZ player gets yellow carded and a penalty is awarded to France; the NZ yellow is later upgraded to a red.
So, *_why wasn't the French yellow card rescinded,_* since everything that happened after the head contact would *_not_* have happened had the officials been awake? Had NZ scored a try it would have been chalked off, so why wasn't the French player allowed back on the field? He wasn't dismissed for foul play (which over-rides everything) but for cynical play.
Personally, I thought it was a disgraceful decision by the officials, one of several that seemed to clearly demonstrate a pro-NZ bias.
I enjoyed whistle watch, but Nigel is becoming as biased as the F1 pundits on Sky. The ruck infringments by IRE was so blatant the whole game, right call not to award the try, not even a 50/50 call. Also if Nigel paid more attention to the game he wouldn't have entertained the last question about the quick throw in by Lowe, seeing as it was a penalty touch finder by SA, hence SA throw in.
Why is every big game decided by TMO calls these days?
Since when is Playing the ball when you are Off your feet OR in front of the ball (off sides) a "grey area" and very technical? The guy attempts a clear out and slumps over the ball onto his knee. He CANT play it, kick it, lie on it or anything. he MUST get away or its a penalty. I agree though that Peter Steph Bound onto him around his neck....so, there's that.
Cynical play leading to a try has always been policed hard in rugby.
Cheslin's try was awarded by the ref in real time, which the ref is perfectly entitled to do on-field if he thinks the try was scored. Lowe was attempting to chuck it back in over the sideline: the ref saw he was successful in doing so, to deny the line-out. Fair enough: Play on. Thanks for coming.
My guy that Australian guy did not come in from the side, you can see the lines on the field in the shot you froze and circled the man! he is from behind the last feet coming in perpendicular with the lines from behind the last feet perpendicular to the lines on the field. Collapsing the maul ok, bit not from the side! Not from your picture anyway.
Gidday Nigel.
I appreciate that Refs/Officials are only human, the game is so dynamic, so many things to consider etc but given the increased scrutiny & the way that each of us see things differently from our couches & certainly have our differing opinions, can extra technology be used/developed to help the game & the officials?
The use of the various cameras strategically placed around the ground enabling a variety of angles, slow mo replays etc are good but could it go further? Could a series of Drones with cameras follow the ball in play so wherever the ball is the Drones are right there, never far away. If technically possible, then decide how many Drones would be sufficient/required. How about starting off with 5 - 1 each 'north, south, east & west' and 1 overhead to see if that is enough or not?
Could the Drones also have multiple Cameras etc to cater for both a ‘Zoomed In’ and a Wide Angle perspective? Then with the use of ‘VAR Technology’, multi-screen viewing of synchronised recordings etc, a ‘full’ picture of any incident/controversy, seeing (say) all 5 angles at the same time, could be reviewed/adjudicated in a more consistent manner courtesy of the increased detail?
We miss you Nigel ❤️
It’s very very technical. 😂
So what nigel is saying is ireland drew with south africa
No what he's saying is when things get very technical, you can't tell if it's right or wrong. It's just, very technical.
@@BrendenEngelbrecht And when a transgression is very technical, the ref should just let it slide.
What he says is that Ireland won and the Boks got lucky 🇮🇪🇮🇪🇮🇪
@@tighthead03 Yeah, write that on a postit and put it in your trophy cabinet. You can put it in the place you had reserved for the 2023 RWC trophy you thought you were gonna win.
🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆
@@mjribes stinger reply! deserved the win. Champions showing why!
Lowe was clearly in touch. The ball touched his leg after his foot was in touch, you can see the shorts move as a consequence of the ball hitting his leg. TMO really should be spotting this.
It's was great skill until he cocked it up.
That's what I thought too. And the ball flight seemed to change after. Can understand why it was given at the same time.
CLEARLY? Tell us a bit more please...
You didn't see the ball touch his leg, and his hand could have brushed his shorts. Ball trajectory didn't change. He wasn't in touch.
@danielburke5865 no change in flight, just thrown cocked up.
Howzit Nigel
James Lowe wouldn't have been able to take a quick throw in, because it was a penalty kick.
However, if he was outside the field of play and jumped back into the field of play while catching the ball Ireland could've played on.
So a player gaining possession while off the feet on the ground is okay? Its just technical?
it's a grey area 😅
I think logic should have prevailed, Willie clearly does a neck roll, but they give penalty to SA because the tackler was slow to roll intervering with Willie aswell as the scoop from 2.
Should have logicaly been a penalty two green cause of neck roll but no penalty try cause 2 scooped it. One illegal action doesnt make another one legal.
WR is a real f*k up, cant imagine these clown paper pushers get paid to make stupid rules, then the poor reff gets all the blame. Expose the rule makers so they'll start taking accountability.
@@aldobonaso3481 what is grey about it? it was pretty obvious
No. Kelleher was on his feet. Le Roux had him in a neck roll which is why he lost his feet. The try should never have been disallowed.
Not grey at all. It was a clear try.
he probably wouldn't have got near it if he wasn't being neck rolled at the time lol
What if Cheslin did not chase and score?. Irish would have cheered James.
I predict a riot this weekend. 🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦
Side entry.
Please explain side entry. When ball the ruck gets cleared quickly. It seems the oposing teams side enter more into the ruck.
I thought the tmo was there to decide on situations where it is NOT clear and obvious. If it was clear and obvious the ref wouldn't ask the tmo. Go figure.
I agree with everything accept the fact that there was a clear and obvious penalty that should've been the real reason the james lowe try was disallowed: Bundee Aki was not supporting his own weight going for the ball.
Those decisions regarding hands on the deck or not are 50/50 split second calls in every single ruck and attempted turn over. With those ones every team win some and loose some, can't complain about them too much either way as they are part of the game. they are what the commentator s would call slightly lucky or unlucky. Completely different however is that Kelleher who the penalty was given against was at the time completely neck rolled face down into to ruck. That's a stone wall yellow, player safety etc. There is an angle you can find that shows it clearly. The ref listening to TMO without a second review gave the penalty against him when the ball hit the back of his heel. For such a huge call in games very often with tiny margins to not do due diligence and double check all the angles was negligent. Then ireland give a soft try from the penalty and it was like a 12-14 point swing.
@@overdrivemurphy not a neck roll. Le roux got cleaned by him not the other way around
So this content is produced by world rugby, are they sharing Mr Owens view? Is somebody passing on the feedback to the TMOs and refs.
Jesus. World Rugby don’t half contradict themselves 😂
Great hindsight.
This is weird. "Technically" the right call but not the right call (bc tmo). Sooo. Was it the right call or not? Since the wc it seems that we are promoting scoring tries from mistakes bc teams are heart-broken that a try was recalked into question. Was it a foul or not (playing the ball when off feet) - thats all we need to know. If other infringements were made (neck roll etc) then it STILL means a try was out of the question and the game mustve stopped there. Does "flowing" the game means ignoring mistakes for the sake of 'spectacular' running rugby? What is clear and obvious is that nothing is clear and obvious.
Agree Owens has the anti's on RSA, previous on here.
As usual you made alot of sense Nigel if only tou where still refering lol
Really sick of every one of those being pub chats about interpretations of the rules. Refereeing has been atrocious for well over 2 years now and nothing is being done to improve it. Getting really tired of "the small margins" in every game being the mood of the referee on that particular day.
Acknowledging what Nigel says about the James Lowe try, but either we do away with the TMO altogether, or we accept that the TMO, with superior vantage, are bound to point out "small technicalities" of infringement. Then any infringement, great or small, as per the rules of rugby MUST be cited.
So you didn't actually listen to a word he said on the incident.
A clear infringement that was seen by thousands of viewers watching live & on video, has to be called by the TMO. Otherwise the ref. is seen by those viewers to have obviously failed.
Nigel said the ref would have played on from the technicality even if he'd seen it because it was so minor.
Rugby has so many rules that 90% of rucks and mauls have some sort of minor infringement. TMOs aren't there to call out small technicalities, they are there to support refs, not be the ref.
@@wiskers69 So when exactly is something a small technical infringement and when it's not? Last I checked, it's either legal or not.
@@wiskers69exactly TMOs never call the put in to the second row. But are able to spot the most minute ruck infringement
The TMO intervening when they're not meant to and handing the victory to the Boks in the process? Unheard of!
SA better team, and deserved to win, but Lowe try should have stood and would have made it a VERY spicy finish
Sorry don't agree with your opion on the first point.. Aki was off his feet and lost contest and then continued to play the ball and then the ireland player drove through and then he lost the contest as well so 2 clear amd obvious offences Mr. Nigel
Can you also find footage of porters illegal scrummaging and please explain why the ref doesnt penalize
Yeah we’re all still looking for it. Sorry about the video proving Ireland should have won
Just because he was getting the better of his opposition dosnt mean he was illegal
@@Stephno86 he was pulling Frans Malherbe down before the engage. It's illegal. We all saw what happened to the Irish scrum afterward
@@altaafkader9675 Ahh poor little Frans, you're breaking everyones heart. Hope he's ok and got a cuddle afterwards.
@@MattConnolly-wi8oh is that what you did to kelleher after he got the try overturned?
On the JL try if that Ref was half-decent we wouldn't have all these arguments at all because 1st infringement was Aki trying to jackall while not supporting his own weight, 2nd Le Roux neck roll 3rd ball being played while player on the ground. So the ref had 3 infringements happen right in front of him and dude was blind as a bat.
FAO of South African fans.The point being made is the TMO is there to assist when what is missed is clear and obvious. The Kelleher incident was not clear and obvious and therrefore not where the TMO should have intervened. I know you are going to be riddled with indignation by this so ive put this here so that you can read it over and over and dont have to go to every single other clip on RUclips about this match and claim otherwise
actually it was pretty clear and obvious - I saw it in realtime and was screaming at the TV that the Irish player was off his feet when he stole the ball. If I could see it, how on earth would a TMO be excused if he chose to ignore it. The fact it that the TMO should not look for reasons to intervene, but must report something if they see it. I do not usually disagree with Nigel, but in this one I do.
@@ptheron You dont understand, what happens when players are moving about in a ruck is not the perogative of the TMO, as it's generally not clear and obvious due to many players interacting generally. its clear and obvious things in open play. So yes you can see Kelleh
ers leg drag the ball back but its only because the TMO intervened and you saw it on television when play was slowed down . Its also not clear and obvious that was done deliberately.. And its also not clear and obvious that there weren't mitigating factors, i.e him being dragged to ground .
@@ptheronvery easy to see what your looking for as the neck roll on kelleher was blatantly ovious yet not talked about enough. Regardless was a mess of a rook and under different circumstances tey would and should have standed
@hugh8891 If Willie is able to neck roll Kelleher, then the Irish have much bigger problems than we think.
@@kh7431"what happens when players are moving around in the ruck is not the perogative of the TMO"
Really? Is there a law that states that? The kick on the ground looked pretty clear and obvious in real-time, and the TMO is allowed to alert the referee of transgression by a team in the run-up to a try.
So the the only argument against what the reffing team did is "you should have let Kelleher get away with playing the ball on the ground"
Problem with the "clear and obvious" narrative is this: what exactly is clear and obvious and to whom?
If the TMO was watching that ruck, it could have been clear and obvious to him that something untoward happened at the ruck.
As a South African, who got the rub of the green with the TMO calls last Saturday, I'm not sure I like this new system. Maybe I'll be proven wrong jn the future, but in the meantime, that stuff happens at rucks.
How about we go the cricket route? Give each captain two TMO referrals, maybe?
Help me make sense of this, the TMO intervened because he saw a clear and obvious penalty, he left it nd the infringing side scored a try.... and you say he should not have come in.... the rule was broken, a penalty should be given and the try disallowed. That is exactly why the TMO is there, he has to call offences that the on field ref does not see! How can you make the statement "it was a very technical penalty so they should have played on and the try should have been allowed"? Was the rule broken yes or no? Yes? ok so what is the sanction? Penalty? ok Penalty it is then. Nothing to talk about here. No try because there was a penalty, simple!
You looking at this Ben Whitehouse yeah?
So kolbe was fast enough to a loud to play the ball
What did he just say? You bring a TMO when it's clear and obvious. If it is so clear and obvious, what is the point of needing a TMO?
World Rugby, your problem is that you have too many rules...
The point is that the TMO should only be coming in to correct something that’s clear and obvious but was missed by the on-field referee
It seems he's making a big distinction between when a TMO interrupts the referee to overturn an on-field decision, and when a referee asks the TMO for help.
Very surprised Nigel is so clear cut on this one, he usually sits on the fence.
No, he's saying the TMO should only intervene (without the referee asking for the TMOs input) if it's clear and obvious from the pictures the TMO has seen that the referee has made a mistake.
Can one not show clips from the games? It's transformative content and seems lazy not to use the clips. I suppose I'll go find the clips in question myself
Definitely agree on the James Lowe try , we as fans definitely don’t won’t tmo coming in and disallowing tries for technical reasons.
So in effect World Rugby have acknowledged the officiating at the SA IRELAND game was a disaster. What a shambles
I must have missed that statement from World Rugby
Although it's on the World Rugby channel Nigel Owens isn't the personality to feel pressured forward a particular narrative, if he thinks the call was bad (which it was) it doesn't really endorse or reject any stance of World Rugby. As a rule most governing sport orgs (World Rugby included) are very staunch defenders of the decisions of their referees, they certainly wouldn't openly call one out. This was Nigel Owens opinion
@@mjribesI think he means via this video. This is planned and filtered via world rugbys media channels. He's usually very forgiving seldom criticised a ref so the whitehouse tmo comment is quite telling.
Although saying it's a world rugby statement is obviously too far. But it is there more decorated and respected ref on their channel.
World Rugby said absolutely nothing and the officiating was ok. Cry harder, cant hear you.
😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊@@mjribes
Good to see the Welsh taking up their usual positions……..stood under the posts awaiting the conversion 🤣
Lol that's what Rassie said about the Sharks...
Not talked about much but the referree moaned at the Irish captain on several occasions. I really dont think he did his side any favours by getting in the ref's ear like that.
As a bok fan though, I'm kinda glad to see the poor officiating shoe on the other foot. Maybe world rugby will listen if it's not just us complaining.
Thats just it though isnt it..when you are winning its all good when losing there is a problem..this applies to Bok fans in the past, the referees haven't changed.
@@user-eq9jv5uf7d Don't underestimate a South African's ability to complain, we're world champs at that too. We've complained about poor officiating win or lose.
More so when we lose sure, but that's what the Irish fans are doing now also.
@@shaunk6822 Not just SA fans mate...many rugby fans in general need to have the self awareness to realise they are incapable of watching the game objectively..its absolutely out of control and sad to see.
The James Lowe try: Ireland forward played the ball back while lying on the ground. That’s how JL got the ball so quickly and cleanly and was able to score. Never have I seen refs allowing play to go on after this infringement. Try disallowed was correct.
He was only on the ground because of an illegal neck roll, should have been advantage play on, if not should have been Irish penalty. The last decision should of been sa ball.
@@millbaymoll2420 Kelleher was being neck rolled by Le Roux right under the refs nose!!! Yet no penalty given. Awful decision. Advantage should have been played to Ireland. Officials were homers!!!
Bundi Aki was off his feet in the ruck trying to play thae ball, so that then was the First issue, so all things considered, right outcome
Ireland was mighty devious at the breakdown this weekend. Some Illegal, but most legal, and you have to give them credit for disrupting such an important part of the game.
In regards to the fan question about whether James Lowe would have been able to do a quick throw in. Well you forgot that it was penalty kick from SA, so if he had planted his in out or left it, it was a Springbok lineout. Unfortunately James Lowe's hindsight is very lacking, it cost his side 12 points, the penalty try was as a result of his failure to read the situation also.
google the definition of hindsight.
7:10 - very odd comment about not wanting there to be scoring consequences to refereeing decisions in case they might be wrong. How about applying that logic to disallowing scores? Or awarding penalties within kickable range? Of course refs decisions will have consequences for the score, which is why it matters *_that they get them right_* and that the three officials on the pitch and the TMO don't just all agree with each other but stand their ground. We have seen too many cases recently where they have either talked themselves out of the right decision for fear of looking either too strict or too lenient, or have completely missed the point entirely of the offence that has been committed - from clear forward passes to classifying players falling into each other as foul play to judging that a player catching a ball has been tackled in the air even though they have one foot clearly on the ground at the time.
And no, the often repeated claim that if you have to rely on the ref getting something right or wrong to change the outcome of the game then you haven't done enough in the other 79 minutes just doesn't fly. Some games are close. And the outcome *_is_* sometimes determined by one blatantly wrong decision, which should *_never_* happen, not in the modern age.
All I'm gonna say is that if the shoe was on the other foot and it was SA that was being disallowed tries on dubious calls, Whitehouse would be receiving death threats right now...
So playing the ball on the ground is now too "technical" to call 😂😂😂
He wasn't "playing" it. He was in a headlock at the time. Wow Saffas not the sharpest tools in the shed.
@@washerdryer3466 you wont say it to our face....
@@topstrekker5579 ohhhhh big man alert!! 😂😂