TMO’s not perfect but don’t give him red card
Why after more than 20 years are we still allowing the Luddite tendency to question the role of the TMO? On BT Sport’s Rugby Tonight programme, one of the guests was JP Doyle, shamefully made redundant by the RFU. Now refereeing in the US league, he was part of the panel that discussed the use of the TMO – it was dispiriting to hear the same old ground still being debated, and fascinating because of what wasn’t mentioned.
Austin Healey has consistently questioned the use of the TMO, and said that after 12 years it ‘still isn’t working perfectly’, which is a remarkable comment – we had referees for over a hundred years before the TMO was brought in, and that was far from perfect! He then went on to say that ‘you don’t want to make the game too sterile – you want a couple of occasions when the ref gets it wrong…because it gives you conversation points’!
This isn’t a local club’s Third XV we’re talking about, but high stakes professional sport, where
winning and losing involves big money, and where jobs are on the line. You have to wonder whether, in his playing days, Austin would have treated a questionable decision from a ref with such equanimity.
JP’s comment that refereeing in the States without a TMO was enjoyable, was interesting, but of minimal relevance! He said that in a recent game he may have made a mistake, but with no TMO there was an acceptance of his ‘fallibility’. Apparently he felt that in the Premiership the introduction of the TMO added
internal pressure – I just don’t get that.
In the real world, if someone in their job wants to be allowed to make mistakes without being subject to scrutiny, they’ll quickly find themselves unemployed, and potentially unemployable!
Premiership refs are well-paid professionals, and everyone, supporters, players, and coaches, has the right to expect them to do the job as well as they can. There still seems to be the attitude that in some way the TMO is eroding the authority of the ref, and that’s just nonsense. Refereeing elite
rugby is too big a job for one person – there is too much going on for them to see everything, and the assistant referees and the TMO are there to protect the referee from being pilloried over a wrong decision.
Their job is to help to minimise the number of things that get missed, and to try to ensure that the game ends with the right result – and that was the glaring omission from the BT Sport discussion.
No one mentioned the importance of the right team winning, which beggars belief. By implication the result matters less to these guys than a bit of controversy that creates talking points, or of speeding up the game! We could always remove the officials altogether – that would speed things up no end, and there would be no shortage of controversy!
I sometimes think these pundits don’t understand the supporter’s mindset – when you’re paid to observe and comment with a degree of evenhandedness, you see a game from an entirely different perspective. As supporters we go along on a Saturday to follow our team, and to hopefully see them win.
For a lot of people who work long hours, seeing their team play at the weekend is one of the most important things in their life. Yes, we want to be entertained, and have the craic and a few beers, but above all we want a win! Most of us can cope with defeat, but we need to feel that we had a fair crack of the whip, and the TMO is a crucial part of ensuring that happens.
The TMO is now a huge part of the game, and there would be uproar if anyone tried to get rid of it. There would be many more wrong decisions, more wrong results, and a real danger of fans losing confidence in the game.