Crusaders v Chiefs
-
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I agree this happens, teams/players who are perceived as 'better' do tend to get the rub of the green from refs.
Perhaps now Blues and Chiefs fans will be more sympathetic towards foreign fans when they complain the ABs are favoured 😀
Chiefs got a number of apologies from the refs last year. Some of which were result impacting. They will probably get another this week.
-
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
In defence of the officials though, we as fans always complain when the game is interrupted for too long because of the TMO looking at all the angles etc, so we want decisions to be made faster. Now they make a decision fast, and it appears it was made too fast. Whatever TMO protocols you use and whichever way it is applied, there will always be people complaining.
100% this. From the first angle it dead set looked like Weber touched the ball (in the opinionif the TMO). Imagine if the officials then went and looked at multiple angles only to confirm that Weber had touched the ball. People would whinge about the decision taking too long and why did they need to check further? If I recall correctly, earlier in this very game there was whinging about how long TMO decisions were taking.
We cannot have it both ways.
Nah. Big big difference between looking at the same thing over and over when the picture is obvious and looking at another angle to confirm a first instinct.
But in the TMO's opinion it was so obvious that Weber touched the ball it was not worth a second look. And I bet the TMO is well aware of the constant bitching about how long it takes to make decisions.
Do we mandate a TMO must look at a least two angles then? Do we also mandate the maximum looks a TMO can take before a decision must be made to keep the whingers at the other end of the spectrum happy? The old try to keep everybody happy trick. Because that always works.
I am sick of the bitching about ref decisions. It seems to happy after and during every game now.
-
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
I am sick of the bitching about ref decisions.
I'm sick of shitty ref decisions.
-
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
In defence of the officials though, we as fans always complain when the game is interrupted for too long because of the TMO looking at all the angles etc, so we want decisions to be made faster. Now they make a decision fast, and it appears it was made too fast. Whatever TMO protocols you use and whichever way it is applied, there will always be people complaining.
100% this. From the first angle it dead set looked like Weber touched the ball (in the opinionif the TMO). Imagine if the officials then went and looked at multiple angles only to confirm that Weber had touched the ball. People would whinge about the decision taking too long and why did they need to check further? If I recall correctly, earlier in this very game there was whinging about how long TMO decisions were taking.
We cannot have it both ways.
What B/S, the TMO could have spent an extra 1 second looking at the footage and saw what we all saw (aside from some on here who are pretending they didn't see it) and the decision would have been made. The we don't get a penalty try, yellow card, try when a player is in the bin that shouldn't have happened. The Crusaders still would have won but there wouldn't be as much controversy.
Yeah he fucked up. He could have done something different. Not arguing that.
-
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
I am sick of the bitching about ref decisions.
I'm sick of shitty ref decisions.
Maybe we should look at why we are getting shitty decisions. Pure incompetence? If you believed social media everyone is incompetent in their jobs and we could all do other people's jobs better.
Has the game become impossible to ref? Has TV coverage made this so? The laws?
-
@crazy-horse I think there are several factors. There has been an incredible number of law changes, law trials and law application changes over the last few years. That makes it confusing for players and spectators, but also difficult for referees. I'm also convinced that rugby fans/spectators whinge more and more. Heck, not only rugby fans. People in general whinge more about everything.
-
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
I am sick of the bitching about ref decisions.
I'm sick of shitty ref decisions.
Maybe we should look at why we are getting shitty decisions. Pure incompetence? If you believed social media everyone is incompetent in their jobs and we could all do other people's jobs better.
Has the game become impossible to ref? Has TV coverage made this so? The laws?
The big one last night seemed to just be incompetence. You can understand the ref thinks that Weber knocks the ball backwards rather than Mo'unga knocking it on, but then if you're going to ask a TMO a decision about a penalty try and yellow card then you should at least ask to go back that decision. This is what league does better IMHO, they will check everything.
Instead we needed to have a captain's challenge (which I think is a stupid law anyway) and then the officials get it 100% wrong. That's incompetence.
In a game the ref is going to miss things, so you can give it a but of leeway. The penalty against Weber (another 3 points to the Crusaders) from the scrum is an example of this. Crap decision but in a live speed match you can understand how the TMO and ref came to that conclusion.
-
I’m all for exciting, attacking rugby but the officiating in this match was an absolute fucking disgrace.
-
During my days playing sport I was an absolute fluffybunny to refs. If they pissed me off they would hear about it. Not something I am proud of, and quite the personality floor if I am honest. It ruined my enjoyment of sport and probably contributed to me giving up playing.
In the middle of my playing days and being a fluffybunny, a curious thing happened. Someone I cared about started being a ref. I would watch them ref and hear and see spectators and players being their own version of a fluffybunny towards them. I hated those people. That someone that I cared about was trying to do their best and they did not deserve the vitriol that was coming their way. But it didn't stop me being a fluffybunny the next time I played.
I guess what I am getting at is the refs fucked up last night, but they are humans trying to do their job to the best of their ability and we should remember that. At least until a call goes against the Crusaders or the ABs. That's when the gloves can come off.
-
@mikethesnow said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
I’m all for exciting, attacking rugby but the officiating in this match was an absolute fucking disgrace.
I know right! They missed a not straight throw from the Chiefs and a jersey pull by a Chief!
-
@booboo said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@kiwimurph We didn't see that still image during the game though. As I said, they made the decision way too fast and should have checked it better. In defence of the officials though, we as fans always complain when the game is interrupted for too long because of the TMO looking at all the angles etc, so we want decisions to be made faster. Now they make a decision fast, and it appears it was made too fast. Whatever TMO protocols you use and whichever way it is applied, there will always be people complaining.
What footage were you watching?
Or perhaps I should ask through which eye?
Although you may be right, it was perhaps video showing Weber didn't touch it, not a still. Shown twice, once immediately after the first angle just as the TMO flubbed his lines, and then again just before the restart for the penalty try. Both of which were "during the game".
can I just confirm, is the footage we see on TV screen exactly what the TMO sees or does the TMO have multiple screens with all angles at the same time? If so wouldn't the TMO have been able to see that second angle earlier?
Not much has been said about the McKenzie try review, I thought on the second angle there the try looked more dubious.
-
@nevorian said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@booboo said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@kiwimurph We didn't see that still image during the game though. As I said, they made the decision way too fast and should have checked it better. In defence of the officials though, we as fans always complain when the game is interrupted for too long because of the TMO looking at all the angles etc, so we want decisions to be made faster. Now they make a decision fast, and it appears it was made too fast. Whatever TMO protocols you use and whichever way it is applied, there will always be people complaining.
What footage were you watching?
Or perhaps I should ask through which eye?
Although you may be right, it was perhaps video showing Weber didn't touch it, not a still. Shown twice, once immediately after the first angle just as the TMO flubbed his lines, and then again just before the restart for the penalty try. Both of which were "during the game".
can I just confirm, is the footage we see on TV screen exactly what the TMO sees or does the TMO have multiple screens with all angles at the same time? If so wouldn't the TMO have been able to see that second angle earlier?
Not much has been said about the McKenzie try review, I thought on the second angle there the try looked more dubious.
Gibbit did an explanation years ago having observed inside the broadcast truck first hand. It may have changed since then but the TMO works with the producer who tells him if there are other angles and how long it will take to get them up.
Considering that the on field ref is designated as the ultimate decision maker and they watch the big screen (which is the same as what we see) then it would be rare that the TMO is seeing something other than what we do. -
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
During my days playing sport I was an absolute fluffybunny to refs. If they pissed me off they would hear about it. Not something I am proud of, and quite the personality floor if I am honest. It ruined my enjoyment of sport and probably contributed to me giving up playing.
In the middle of my playing days and being a fluffybunny, a curious thing happened. Someone I cared about started being a ref. I would watch them ref and hear and see spectators and players being their own version of a fluffybunny towards them. I hated those people. That someone that I cared about was trying to do their best and they did not deserve the vitriol that was coming their way. But it didn't stop me being a fluffybunny the next time I played.
I guess what I am getting at is the refs fucked up last night, but they are humans trying to do their job to the best of their ability and we should remember that. At least until a call goes against the Crusaders or the ABs. That's when the gloves can come off.
I agree with this point, but right now the technology has started impacting the game so much that assistant refs don't even look at whether a player's foot may have touched the ground in the act of scoring a diving try, and they are willing to let play go on even if it doesn't pass the pub test, because they know that the TMO will end up making the decision anyway. The incentive here appears to push them away from making a decision, and it's leading them to become worse.
Then the TMOS are incompetent, and we end up with a worse product that takes longer, with a bunch of strange rulings.
Personally speaking, if we are going to have a Captain's challenge, I'd prefer it if they just cut the TMO back to grounding and foul play (or even nothing unless they are called on by the captain), so that when the TMO does get involved it is because the player's have got them involved. In that case, I hope that the TMO would also be 'less' on the referee side, and perhaps a bit more likely to judge the situation more objectively. In reality though, I think it would be still be a lottery, so why bother having them at all?
-
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nevorian said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@booboo said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@kiwimurph We didn't see that still image during the game though. As I said, they made the decision way too fast and should have checked it better. In defence of the officials though, we as fans always complain when the game is interrupted for too long because of the TMO looking at all the angles etc, so we want decisions to be made faster. Now they make a decision fast, and it appears it was made too fast. Whatever TMO protocols you use and whichever way it is applied, there will always be people complaining.
What footage were you watching?
Or perhaps I should ask through which eye?
Although you may be right, it was perhaps video showing Weber didn't touch it, not a still. Shown twice, once immediately after the first angle just as the TMO flubbed his lines, and then again just before the restart for the penalty try. Both of which were "during the game".
can I just confirm, is the footage we see on TV screen exactly what the TMO sees or does the TMO have multiple screens with all angles at the same time? If so wouldn't the TMO have been able to see that second angle earlier?
Not much has been said about the McKenzie try review, I thought on the second angle there the try looked more dubious.
Gibbit did an explanation years ago having observed inside the broadcast truck first hand. It may have changed since then but the TMO works with the producer who tells him if there are other angles and how long it will take to get them up.
Considering that the on field ref is designated as the ultimate decision maker and they watch the big screen (which is the same as what we see) then it would be rare that the TMO is seeing something other than what we do.Assuming that the technology has not, at least, got worse in the last 20 years, I can speak from my experience of working at the TAB as the video operator in the stipes room. They had their own operator (me), access to all camera angles, and all the recordings were set up to rewind and play at that same time; we had a few small screens and one big one (which they would ask me to bring up, e.g., "back straight camera first gt12, then let's see it from the stand camera, then....").
I would assume that the protocols must include something like that to allow TMOs to rule on foul play during the game (i.e., when the ref can't see it), but for movements shown on the stadium screen, I assume that it is the 'big' screen selected by the video operator/Sky director for the TMO. I assume that this screen is chosen at their guidance, which means that if they fuck it up, it's on them.
-
Watching back now.
The penalty against Weber at scrum time to give the Crusaders an 11-10 leaf was questionable - ball was out and he didn't look offside. The next lineout after the restart, the ref judged the crusaders going forward, which they didn't look to be at all, after both players grabbed it in the air.
McKenzie's try was a bit sus as well.
EDIT: penalty against Black 2 in the 36th minute completely ignored red player in the side at the same ruck.
The ref coaches will have some work to do this week.
-
One of the advantages of using Sports Ears at SR games is that I listen to the referees feed which is communication between the ref and ARs and any on-field sound. In previous years I was surprised how often the officials liked to pat each other on the back when making a decision (great call that, well done this, etc). Some of the dialogue was cringe-worthy. The ARs were very reluctant to disagree with the ref unless the evidence was blatantly obvious. Now with this "not clear and obvious" directive they, but more so the TMO, have a "get out of jail free" card. There won't be any accountability from Lawrence and co.
-
@bovidae said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
The ARs were very reluctant to disagree with the ref unless the evidence was blatantly obvious
The ref is the sole judge if Law on the park 😉
You don't disagree with the captain unless he asks for your opinion 😎
-
@bovidae said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
There won't be any accountability from Lawrence and co.
I guess if you're already using the top refs you have available, you can't bench them.
The problem arises when they won't take direction. A few refs I've met are pretty arrogant, when I'm on the sideline as an accredited AR, but a lot appreciate the help.
There's a young bloke coming through the ranks who I reckon could do the top job. Fit and great temperament.
-
Ok well I just saw the tackle leading up to Weber's yellow.
No fucking way that hit a black player. Not a single fucking chance looking at the reverse angle they cut away from. That was fucking appalling.
Scrum down just inside the 22 was the only result.
I quit watching the replay at that point. Get. Fucked.
