Captain’s review will cut chance of cheating – Blackett
LEE BLACKETT believes introducing a cricket-style captain’s review system into rugby would help reduce the time spent on referrals to the television match officials and cut the risk of players simulating injury like footballers to get an opponent sent off.
The Wasps head coach saw his side knocked out of the European Cup at the hands of Clermont Auvergne earlier this month after the officials missed a forward pass in the build-up to the deciding try in the final minute and did not review it.
“I like the cricket version with the captain able to appeal,” said Blackett. “We are an entertainment game and is worth considering something different like that. A captain has a challenge if they want to use it and if they get it wrong, they lose it. I think it would be good for the game and mean we are not checking everything as we are at the moment.”
Football pundits are every week debating the merits of the VAR system which checks not just for offside after a goal is scored but whether a foul was committed by the attacking side in the buildup. There was controversy at White Hart Lane last weekend when an Edinson Cavani goal for Manchester United was ruled out on review because Scott McTominay was ruled to have put his
arm in the face of Son Heung-min who collapsed to the ground and stayed there despite contact being minimal.
“We have to be careful we do not create that diving culture in our sport,” said Blackett. “You look at football and fear it will happen in rugby more and more because if a player does not go down, he does not get rewarded. How many times are we seeing captains asking referees to look at something every single game?
“With the number of cards going around at the moment, I panic every time it goes to the TMO. We all want fair results and consistency in what we do. If you get that, you won’t be too bothered.”
Bristol’s director of rugby, Pat Lam, supports the idea of a review system, but the problem his side faced during their Champions Cup quarterfinal in Bordeaux two weeks ago was the lack of camera angles provided to the TMO with a local television director in charge of the system rather than the match organisers.
“I like the captain’s
review idea,” said Lam. “The question is how you would go about it and the number of reviews a team would have. I like the consequence that if you go for one and do not get it there is a punishment, such as a penalty. What we are all striving for is decisions to be correct.
“I had a good chat with World Rugby after our game in Bordeaux and I want to emphasise that we lost that match because we gave away a number of ridiculous penalties, not because decisions went against us. I have confidence that there is a process for referees and TMOs that they are accountable to and the key is to learn from what happens in matches.
“There also has to be a protocol when it comes to television production because the last thing you want is accusations made against directors or producers. This is not something isolated to France and I have seen it happen in other countries. As long as there is a protocol for everyone to follow, people can be answerable to it.”