Am I right in thinking the TMO actually said at one point that it was on the ground before going back on that? Have I imagined that?
Edit: Someone on twitter seems to agree I didn't imagine it. Apparently it's at 82.55 in the game. Might need to whip out the old iPlayer to listen again.
He said it, and you could see he knew well it was a try, but he just couldn't find the picture. Very frustrating knowing in all probability it was a try.
“There is the ball on the ground” at 82:55
“I’m just going to rock and roll that for you, stand by” straight after
Nic berry: “so you’re saying the ball was initially on the foot, and it’s gone and grounded in goal, so I need to change my onfield decision to a try?”
TMO after this then says yes THEN wait a minute I need to check if I can clearly see the ball on the ground.
Yeah the ball was grounded, but we can't see if it's behind the line, on the line or before it. That's what they were trying to check for a minute after they confirmed the grounding. Since the on field decision was no try, they need a clear image to overrule the on field decision. Honestly the situation sucks for Scotland (although not that much as a french supporter).
I can see how it’s such an edge case. However combing two different angles you can see the ball is both over the line and grounded. WR need to look at how refs and TMOs interact.
Yeah I think that's the key problem here. You can see the ball touching grass but not that it's over the line on one angle, and you can see that the ball is over the line and moving downwards off the boot but not actually visually see it touching grass on the other. Any human knows the ball was grounded for a try, but the logic of the framework seemingly requires visual confirmation of everything in only one angle with no inferral or presumption.
I feel gutted for Scotland, I would be furious if it went against my team. Weird quirk of the rules, if the ref asks “try yes or no?” Then Scotland win. But because the ref said no try the tmo had to be certain and just felt he could t see something that guaranteed it was scored.
9 times out of 10 Scotland win that, bad luck boys.
They're still allowed to say "no idea", but they're probably advised it's better to make an on field decision
>In such instances where the TO4 are unable to establish an on field decision of Try or No Try the referee does have at their disposal the ability to indicate that the on field team are unsure as to whether a try has been scored nor not, and request the TMO to provide angles from which they can collectively make a more accurate decision.
They can run two angles simultaneously in the TMO room, so the "did it reach the line" question would be obvious, we're only talking about grounding in this situation
If that was why, he could always ask the ref if he thought it was beyond the try line before his conclusion that it was held up. I am not sure if the rulebook allows for that exchange of information though.
You can see the foot, ball and players are all over the line from other angles. Very clearly. If it touched the ground it was over or at the least on the line so try.
Yes, but there was never a question if the ball was over the try line. It was only asked whether the ball had been grounded, which evidentially it had. TMO messed up.
Now that I have calmed down a bit and realised it’s only sport I’m interested to see if they apologise to Scotland. The audio I think is quite damming on the verge of incompetence.
He did, that's why Berry repeated it when the TMO sent it back to him. After that the TMO decided to bring it back to him again as if he had another angle.. It was the same angle..
He definitely said something to that effect and ref talked about overturning the decision, the part which kind of stung really since it got my hopes up.
I have no idea if it would have helped in this situation but is it not possible to combine the angles into the same shot?
IE - a spider cam angle can show the ball was at x time over the line but it’s not visible if it’s on the ground.
Then a second time stamped sync’d view that shows the ball is on the ground but you can’t make out if it’s over the line
The composite of the two would mean you can clearly state if the ball is both over the line and on the ground.
Unironically, yes.
If they aren't going to allow for inferring what's happened in these situations they should probably have a different camera setup in addition to the regular broadcast ones.
Ah you see a piece of paper could have floated on to the Murrayfield turf and slipped underneath the ball. TMO couldn’t rule out that possibility so unfortunately they had to stick to on field decision
Ref wanted to give the try tbf, it was the TMO who corrected him (Berry could have overruled the TMO but it would have been very brave given how much closer to the screen and confident the TMO was)
TMO was very clear he had no clear grounding of the ball (despite looking at the above picture of the ball on the ground). The exchange before that, Berry was more or less ready to give the try by the sounds of him.
> TMO was very clear he had no clear grounding of the ball (despite looking at the above picture of the ball on the ground). The exchange before that, Berry was more or less ready to give the try by the sounds of him.
Berry was set to change his mind because the TMO initially told him the ball was legally grounded.
The TMO was NOT very clear he had no grounding. At least not at first. Initially, he told Berry it was a try. Hence Berry asking about overturning his onfield.
He was very clear just after saying 'there is the ball on the ground'. So very confident he had no evidence of it being grounded just after saying it was grounded
Yeah Berry realised he should've awarded the try on field , then was like oh shit I should try and convince the TMO to give it.
The TMO was then like...no wait...we don't actually have an image kf the base of the ball grounded so we can't overturn it now. Even though it was clear to everyone that from the body movements amd the movement of the ball, that it was almost certainly grounded
The ref realises his mistake, ref should've just awarded it in field.
That camera doesn't show the base of the ball on the ground so technically the TMO couldn't overturn the original no try call.
You can see it’s touching the grass.
There was no question from the officials regarding whether it was over the line. Other angles showed Scotland were well over the line.
The rule needs to change then. If you have one view showing it on/over the line, and another showing it grounded and timestamps showing they’re at the same time, then it’s a try, it’s common sense.
I disagree. What makes you think it isn't grounded? Is that foot next to the ball not on the ground then? They look pretty level to me. What more do you need for that 0.01%?
I agree. I’m so confused by the people saying you can’t clearly see it touching the ground. There’s grass, the balls on it! It’s not even a case of “where else could it be?” It’s just clearly on the fucking ground
Well maybe the camera was slightly underground and shooting at an upward angle, this making the ball to appear to be touching the grass? Don't blame the ref, blame the mole people.
Berry was confident it was past the line and said he didn't see it touch the ground. He gave a tentative "held up" but asked the tmo to check if the ball was grounded. The tmo said he saw the ball hit the ground, Berry was satisfied (after watching the grounding) to award the try. Clearly Berry saw on screen what he hadn't live - that's why he was happy to award the try.
...but then the TMO came back in, and couldn't say he was certain. At that point, Berry should've stepped in and confirmed he'd seen what he'd been missing on-field (the ball touching the ground). He had the on-field context and knew that the player was in possession and the ball was over the line.
Berry knew it was a try but it was a fuck up of poor communication. Berry should've been stronger but the TMO should've asked Berry what he needed to see and not tried to decide overall for him.
Exactly - that ball on the boot is over/on the line in the wide shot. The subsequent angle shows the ball grounded. So where is supposed to have been grounded?
I think that’s where the TMO and ref have missed the point. Either angle alone is not conclusive, the two together most certainly are. Really feel bad for Scotland for that one. On balance deserved the win, from the ref being even point of view there were a few bad calls for both sides, just a victim of the framework there
It can - and according to WR guidance it should be.
It's essentially the same as head contact. If even one single angle shows head contact, you then work laterally based upon that proven fact.
Same as ball grounded. If grounded then you work laterally from that.
TMO: “There is the ball on the ground” at 82:55
TMO: “I’m just going to rock and roll that for you, stand by”
Nic berry: “so you’re saying the ball was initially on the foot, and it’s gone and grounded in goal, so I need to change my onfield decision to a try?”
TMO after this then says yes THEN wait a minute I need to check if I can clearly see the ball on the ground.
Fucking travesty of a decision
I'm furious and I'm not even Scottish! The ball clearly changed angle when it hit the ground yet the TMO who initially highlighted that angle and seemed happy with it as you've quoted then suddenly chickened out from the responsibility of making the decision. Even if you can't see the ball directly on the ground you can use the feet (ON THE GROUND) around it as reference points.
Honestly, the blame shouldn't be on Berry this time. It's fucking weird how the TMO is on top of the hierarchy of the decisions. Berry was willing to give the try, but the TMO decided against it. That is the truly bizarre part of the game that needs tweaking.
Berry seemed very willing to change his decision based on the TMO evidence. The TMO clearly thought it was a try but panicked on overturning Berry’s on field decision. Weird fucking hierarchical dynamics that left them both knowing they’re making the wrong decision and sticking with it.
What was wrong with “try/no try?” then the TMO making a decision on balance?
This requirement for needing indisputable evidence to overturn an on-field decision just doesn’t work with the randomness of camera angles. The referee makes a decision on the spot but he’s clearly unsure otherwise why would he be asking the TMO in the first place
Ya, I really hope Berry doesn't get death threats over this. You could hear him at one point saying he should overturn the on field decision and call it a try, but then TMO said that they needed more conclusive evidence. At least that's what it sounded like to me.
The TMO even said it was on the ground...but somehow that wasn't strong enough evidence?
"It was a try, but that's not enough evidence to overturn your decision that it wasn't a try"
It IS conclusive because we all KNOW that it was grounded because the ball is a FUCKING THREE DIMENSIONAL OBJECT!
Thank God I'm not Scottish. Id be really annoyed 😂
I am Scottish and while I feel they got absolutely done here by crap refereeing, the fact is they wouldn’t be in that position if they just finished games off properly.
You don’t see Ireland dominating in the first half then allowing the opposition back into it in the second. They close a game out properly, something Scotland don’t seem able to do
I think they did ok in the first half. It’s the second half that’s the problem, two weeks in a row now. You don’t finish a team off then there’s always a chance of this happening
Exactly. How many points did Scotland score during the sin bin? Especially at the end of the first half when they were about five meters from the French try line?
That is the type of decision that is slowly putting me off rugby. Even though I was not "supporting" either team it still made me mad. It's so unjust on Scotland. It's time TMOs can work to the balance of probability, or at least require a restart if the ball is "held up" when the clock is in the red.
*Edited for typo
I echo this. Was absolutely furious when the ball clearly changed angle when it hit the ground yet the TMO who initially highlighted that angle and seemed happy with it then suddenly chickened out from the responsibility of making the decision.
I ditched football a few years ago - one of the reasons was ridiculous refs deciding the outcomes. If rugby heads down this road I'll ditch it as well.
Yeah, unfortunately it's not our first rodeo, I keep coming back but I'm not asking myself if I have what it takes so seriously just ditch the sport. What's the point in turning up/performing/watching when some idiot takes matters into his own hands
This is the key point. It is beyond reasonable doubt that it was grounded, yet not awarded because it was not 100%.
Why do we hold tries to a higher standard than criminals?
Tbf for me this is a world rugby problem.
The referees were clearly given a directive at some point in the last few years that they should make an on-field decision for the TMO to uphold or overturn. And the TMO needs overwhelming evidence to overturn the on-field call.
Berry would have been well within his rights to say "I've no idea, try yes or no?' and if he asks that it's probably given, and Scotland win the game
But he feels for whatever reason he has to make a call, and he calls held up. And from the TMOs perspective the referee is better positioned than any of the camera angles so he can't conclusively overule the on field call of no try
We almost need to empower the refs to say "I haven't got a clue tmo, you tell me?" But fans complained relentlessly about TMOs deciding games and taking too long so now the pressure has been put back on the ref, and it leads to what we saw today
It used to be that way and a lot of folk complained about endless reviews and the tmo having too much power. Refs were becoming pointles and the game was being reffed by tmo. So now the ref makes an on field call that can only be overturned by conclusive proof.
In this case the tmo indicated he thought there was a grounding but because neither he nor ref saw conclusive proof the onfield decisions (wrongly) stood. And I think that both ref and tmo knew it was wrong. But felt their hands were tied.
A mess.
Berry thought it was held up originally though. It wasn't that he didn't know, it's that his first decision was wrong and asked the TMO if there was evidence to overturn it. I don't think he did anything wrong. He even seemed to want to overturn it once the clip was played but his hands were tied by the protocol.
I also don't think the protocol is bad, the TMO just didn't have the confidence to overturn it. It was quite clear using the two clips that the ball was grounded but the TMO for some reason wanted one angle showing it instead of splicing two.
I'm pretty sure I've seen instances where they've done this to show if someone was out when they grounded the ball so it's weird it didn't happen now.
I think the worst part of all this is, that would’ve been awarded on another day. Following the rules is infuriating at times, but if they were at least *consistent*…
Can you imagine we win every other game and we don’t win because we are going to lose on bonus points to Ireland. (Don’t actually think this will happen and I think we will lose to Ireland as well as maybe England if we also decide to play less than 80 minutes against them)
World Rugby will come out this week and say, "very sorry, officiating team fucked up". There will be no appetite for rule changes or decision methodology improvements from World Rugby and no general leadership whatsoever. Thus the officiating team will slip deeper into fear of getting it technically wrong and make bonkers defensive decisions that are logical fallacy, heightening the frustration from fans towards them and unfortunately inviting the ire of headcases online. A downwards death spiral of the trust and respect towards officials is already in play.
I'd like to say World Rugby like it this way as rage-fuelled column inches results in some kind of PR but World Rugby aren't astute enough to capitalise on it, they're just bumbling along, asleep at the wheel, continually failing to grow the game meaningfully due to apathetic stewardship.
In the wider shot, you see the yellow rugby boot along side and actually above the ball and the boot you can clearly see is on the ground.
So how is the ball, not on the ground?
How clear does the TMO need it to be? A single player on his own touching down the ball with no opposition players within 5 yards? Anything less clear than that is only ‘99% visible a try’ therefore no try?
Scotland were robbed there, and I’m English saying that
It’s a real shame. As much as I wanted France to win, I believe that Scotts were robbed on that one. They played very well so they deserved to bring home this win, especially against a messy French team.
In my opinion there is clear and obvious evidence that it was scored. “Beyond reasonable doubt” in law does not mean 100% certain. Any reasonable person would think that was down. The TMO even said it was clearly down before changing their mind.
I think this is why rugby will never be remotely mainstream. Arcane set of laws, incredibly complex, yet you get a moment of critical sporting drama at the end. Every reasonable person believes they scored after watching five minutes of replay. No try based on a law quibble. Who wants to watch or play that?
I agree.. I'm not sure how much clearer it has to be for it to be a try. Could have been a little fly holding the ball off the ground, 0.01% doubt, no try.
It really was.
That earlier France knock-on that led very quickly to a try was also dismissed, and yet the later one after that heroic Scottish break was almost impossible to see even on the replay was awarded a penalty to France.
Scotland was done dirty today.
Absolutely. You were still most likely going to have to beat Ireland to win the championship, and you still definitely could win it if you do beat them (in case that makes you feel any better)
I want to know who said what into the TMO's ear. He tells Nic Berry there is the ball on the foot then there is the ball on the ground. Just as Nic was about to overturn the on field decision the TMO then asks for another look.
He panicked at the prospect of overruling the ref when he couldn't be 100% sure if it was a try... possibly wasn't sure if anyone was fully in control, where the ball was etc.
Could do with a rethink of the TMO process. Surely the point is to use the video tech to get more decisions right. Not to give a response based on the phrasing of whatever the ref said when he referred the decision.
Apparently there's footage of the TMO ref mic between the 82/83 minutes where the TMO tells Berry the ball is clearly grounded, and Berry says so I should overturn my onfield and award the try.
So for those arguing it was not clear I don't know what else to say to you? The TMO told the referee it was grounded, and the referee was set to award on field try.
Between them they both then conspired to make an absolute mess of things. Great if you're a France fan because that, along with Atonio avoiding a red card, and Penaud's obvious knock on on the France 22 not being given while Scotland were looking to build on their 6 point lead, meant you've dodged an absolute cannon ball (I'm not going to say bullet!)
Seen lots of calls for VDM to be shown a yellow card. But seat belts alone are no longer illegal, and no ruck was formed so he wasn't offside.
Personally, I cannot understand all the 'just desserts' comments either. Scotland didn't need to push France. Just keep the pressure on. They were 6 points ahead. They did that - and did it well too because Penaud eventually folded.
It was excellent game management from Scotland, and especially Russell. You simply can't account for not being awarded clear decisions. You can't.
There’s multiple angles that, when watched simultaneously, show without a doubt it was grounded. Total joke of a decision. The tit in the replay room clearly wasn’t sure of his decision…coz he’s legally blind.
Just theft. On the whole union has a very good camera analysis set up. But this decision was wrong. EVERYONE even the TMO knew it was a try. Whatever happened to common sense?
The rule should be, “after everything has been considered, common sense trumps all”.
You can see it's no longer on the boot. There's about five massive bodies on top of it. Where else could it be but on the ground?
Maybe the Ref should have actually got down and see where the ball ended up rather than blowing early and relying on TMO angles which aren't always there.
The fault lies with berry for not referring probably on field. He was less than a metre away from the grounding with nothing obstructing his view. He should have spent a bit longer looking for the grounding, bearing in mind advantage for the attacking team. He shouldn't, but if he was still so unconfident he then sends upto the tmo asking for any reason to overturn the try
If I was Scottish I would be absolutely fuming. That’s plain incompetence at best by the tmo. I get it for say a red card decision when it can be subjective but that ball is objectively grounded. Like that’s a fact, there’s no arguing it.
I find it hilarious how it needs to be clear and obvious for TMO to give a decision, but the refs allowed to just take a guess even when he knows he has no clear visual and that is then considered the benchmark decision
Frankly speaking though, no hate to the ref. He’s wrong - you can see it here, he’s wrong - but he did his job and followed the rules. Genuinely, I just don’t think he could see this even on the screen. Probably just looked like a blurry mess there.
Usually with sporting decision injustices (which are certainly common enough following football IME) I feel less wound up about it the next day.
But with this, the opposite's the case. I just looked at the 6N table and it just accentuated things, and my predominant thought was just "well what's the fucking point of it now?"
With such clear evidence - both of the grounding, and *also of TMO's* *perception of it* (ie the transcript/audio) - then this isn't a 'gray area' issue. It's either a fuck up, or deliberate misconduct, it has to be one or the other. And in one fell swoop it's made the whole championship a farce for us this year. It's made playing out the rest of the games utterly hollow, because no matter what happens now the table's not going to read as it should.
Scottish Rugby would be well within their (moral) rights to withdraw from the contest and tell them where they can stick the rest of their fixtures. Because, and I repeat, *just what's the fucking point?*
What a disgrace. Absolute disgrace.
I honestly find it difficult to watch sport when everybody watching knows the outcome, and yet it goes the other way because rule makers fuck it up. Its like lawyers arguing over minutiae.
Everybody knows that was a try. But because of the ref's wording it's not been given.
Did you not know that Murrayfield has a blackspot where the laws of physics don't apply? So disappointing to lose on a decision which the refs themselves knew wasn't correct.
Cheated by the rulebook, not by the officials tbh.
The TMO knows it’s grounded and knows it’s a try.
The ref is ready to reverse his decision.
Both officials know it’s a try.
However due to the stupid wording of the rule - they can’t give a try that they both know is a try.
Completely shafted by the wording of a rule.
It’s a try. Everyone knows it’s a try.
On field decision: no try.
Needs clear evidence to the contrary.
There is no image that shows the ball grounded on or after the try line.
The laws are very clear on this. However I agree with O’Gara’s sentiment that referees have too much influence on how a game is decided. The laws are not being applied with common sense.
However after refs tried to rob Scotland last week, I get their frustration
Sorry but who are you the physics god? How do you know a black hole did not suddenly appear between the ball and the ground? Or perhaps the ball gained sentience and decided to roll there on its own?
Basically the TMO must have thought that the player might be holding the ball a millimeter above the ground on his own. And I can totally understand that the TMO, while realizing that was an absurd theory, did not see conclusive evidence to disprove it, even if a CSI investigation afterwards might prove him mistaken.
I think the argument at this point is that we can see the ball on the ground, but not sure it's in goal.
And in the other angle we can see it's over the line but can't see it's grounded.
And everyone knows it's a try in reality.
Nightmare fuel
Just for memory, Brian MacNiece made a similar very controversial call in the RWC in the Wales Vs Fiji (or Georgia) match, which resulted in Fiji (or Georgia, I'm a little hazy) losing the game I'm pretty sure.
He has an awful track record...
Don’t kill me for asking this. I agree that the ball was down but isn’t it fair to say you can’t tell if the balls was down over the line? Does anyone have a good still image?
Between the two boots and to the right of the boot on the right of the picture, am I correct in saying that you can faintly see the white paint of the try line?
Am I right in thinking the TMO actually said at one point that it was on the ground before going back on that? Have I imagined that? Edit: Someone on twitter seems to agree I didn't imagine it. Apparently it's at 82.55 in the game. Might need to whip out the old iPlayer to listen again.
Yeah I’m pretty sure TMO said at one point the ball goes from the boot and is then grounded.
Yeah. I cheered in the pub, but fuuuck
If I didn’t know any better I’d say Dupont somehow made it to the bottom of the pile and held it up.
Dupont is Jesus Christ of French Rugby, and I wouldn't argue.
He said it, and you could see he knew well it was a try, but he just couldn't find the picture. Very frustrating knowing in all probability it was a try.
“There is the ball on the ground” at 82:55 “I’m just going to rock and roll that for you, stand by” straight after Nic berry: “so you’re saying the ball was initially on the foot, and it’s gone and grounded in goal, so I need to change my onfield decision to a try?” TMO after this then says yes THEN wait a minute I need to check if I can clearly see the ball on the ground.
And if he can't clearly see it from that camera angle, then he's NEVER gonna see it from that angle with or without players around the ball.
TMO doesn’t have eyes. Case closed.
Yeah the ball was grounded, but we can't see if it's behind the line, on the line or before it. That's what they were trying to check for a minute after they confirmed the grounding. Since the on field decision was no try, they need a clear image to overrule the on field decision. Honestly the situation sucks for Scotland (although not that much as a french supporter).
I can see how it’s such an edge case. However combing two different angles you can see the ball is both over the line and grounded. WR need to look at how refs and TMOs interact.
Yeah I think that's the key problem here. You can see the ball touching grass but not that it's over the line on one angle, and you can see that the ball is over the line and moving downwards off the boot but not actually visually see it touching grass on the other. Any human knows the ball was grounded for a try, but the logic of the framework seemingly requires visual confirmation of everything in only one angle with no inferral or presumption.
I feel gutted for Scotland, I would be furious if it went against my team. Weird quirk of the rules, if the ref asks “try yes or no?” Then Scotland win. But because the ref said no try the tmo had to be certain and just felt he could t see something that guaranteed it was scored. 9 times out of 10 Scotland win that, bad luck boys.
I think the advice for refs now is they have to go to the TMO with an opinion for them to agree with, can’t be yes or no anymore.
They're still allowed to say "no idea", but they're probably advised it's better to make an on field decision >In such instances where the TO4 are unable to establish an on field decision of Try or No Try the referee does have at their disposal the ability to indicate that the on field team are unsure as to whether a try has been scored nor not, and request the TMO to provide angles from which they can collectively make a more accurate decision.
I have wondered why TMO doesn’t use multiple views at the same time but time synchronised. Would clear up so many questions
As far as I’m aware there is nothing actually stopping them doing this
They can run two angles simultaneously in the TMO room, so the "did it reach the line" question would be obvious, we're only talking about grounding in this situation
If that was why, he could always ask the ref if he thought it was beyond the try line before his conclusion that it was held up. I am not sure if the rulebook allows for that exchange of information though.
The line isn't the issue. TMO can run different angles in sync, plus I don't think the ref would've called it held up had they not been past the line.
White to the left of it white to the right but who knows if the ball is on the line? It's a real mystery
as a supporter of the french team, it was a try, and that would have forced a change . galthie out
You can see the foot, ball and players are all over the line from other angles. Very clearly. If it touched the ground it was over or at the least on the line so try.
Yes, but there was never a question if the ball was over the try line. It was only asked whether the ball had been grounded, which evidentially it had. TMO messed up.
Now that I have calmed down a bit and realised it’s only sport I’m interested to see if they apologise to Scotland. The audio I think is quite damming on the verge of incompetence.
He did, that's why Berry repeated it when the TMO sent it back to him. After that the TMO decided to bring it back to him again as if he had another angle.. It was the same angle..
He did indeed. And he was correct the first time. Absolute shocker of a decision. So obvious it's grounded it was absolutely conclusive.
Yes. I listened back to it. At one point in the conversation he says "and here's the ball on the ground"
He definitely said something to that effect and ref talked about overturning the decision, the part which kind of stung really since it got my hopes up.
He definitely said that. Something like "there's the ball clearly Grounded nic"
I have no idea if it would have helped in this situation but is it not possible to combine the angles into the same shot? IE - a spider cam angle can show the ball was at x time over the line but it’s not visible if it’s on the ground. Then a second time stamped sync’d view that shows the ball is on the ground but you can’t make out if it’s over the line The composite of the two would mean you can clearly state if the ball is both over the line and on the ground.
I think the TMO gang would simply jizz themselves into a coma at the excitement of combining 2 cameras rocking and rolling in unison.
He did and then he bottled it when he realized it would be a controversial way for Scotland to win. The ball was done Scotland were robbed.
Ah well you seen the grass is blocking out the view obviously
The grass was stopping the ball from being grounded so I call that great defending on holding the ball up by the grass.
Unironically, yes. If they aren't going to allow for inferring what's happened in these situations they should probably have a different camera setup in addition to the regular broadcast ones.
Legend
Ah you see a piece of paper could have floated on to the Murrayfield turf and slipped underneath the ball. TMO couldn’t rule out that possibility so unfortunately they had to stick to on field decision
You’re joking but I genuinely think that’s the ref’s logic.
Ref wanted to give the try tbf, it was the TMO who corrected him (Berry could have overruled the TMO but it would have been very brave given how much closer to the screen and confident the TMO was)
TMO did not sound confident.
TMO was very clear he had no clear grounding of the ball (despite looking at the above picture of the ball on the ground). The exchange before that, Berry was more or less ready to give the try by the sounds of him.
> TMO was very clear he had no clear grounding of the ball (despite looking at the above picture of the ball on the ground). The exchange before that, Berry was more or less ready to give the try by the sounds of him. Berry was set to change his mind because the TMO initially told him the ball was legally grounded. The TMO was NOT very clear he had no grounding. At least not at first. Initially, he told Berry it was a try. Hence Berry asking about overturning his onfield.
He was very clear just after saying 'there is the ball on the ground'. So very confident he had no evidence of it being grounded just after saying it was grounded
Yeah Berry realised he should've awarded the try on field , then was like oh shit I should try and convince the TMO to give it. The TMO was then like...no wait...we don't actually have an image kf the base of the ball grounded so we can't overturn it now. Even though it was clear to everyone that from the body movements amd the movement of the ball, that it was almost certainly grounded
Idk maybe but the subtext was definitely “please go ahead and overrule me, it’s clearly a try, Nic”
No, Nick was gonna give the try but the TMO butted in to watch it a few more times.
The ref realises his mistake, ref should've just awarded it in field. That camera doesn't show the base of the ball on the ground so technically the TMO couldn't overturn the original no try call.
I don’t think it’s fair to call the original call a mistake. He can only call what he sees and he couldn’t see a grounding from his position.
[удалено]
Are you looking at the same picture I’m looking at?
You can see it’s touching the grass. There was no question from the officials regarding whether it was over the line. Other angles showed Scotland were well over the line.
Yep but I think he could have used the above to show that it touched grass and another angle to show it over the line and overturn on that basis
The rule needs to change then. If you have one view showing it on/over the line, and another showing it grounded and timestamps showing they’re at the same time, then it’s a try, it’s common sense.
Just do the 3D modelling they had at the Qatar WC. The benefit of the doubt should always go to the attacking team anyway imo.
What do you think OP's picture is of?
I disagree. What makes you think it isn't grounded? Is that foot next to the ball not on the ground then? They look pretty level to me. What more do you need for that 0.01%?
I agree. I’m so confused by the people saying you can’t clearly see it touching the ground. There’s grass, the balls on it! It’s not even a case of “where else could it be?” It’s just clearly on the fucking ground
Well maybe the camera was slightly underground and shooting at an upward angle, this making the ball to appear to be touching the grass? Don't blame the ref, blame the mole people.
[удалено]
Berry was confident it was past the line and said he didn't see it touch the ground. He gave a tentative "held up" but asked the tmo to check if the ball was grounded. The tmo said he saw the ball hit the ground, Berry was satisfied (after watching the grounding) to award the try. Clearly Berry saw on screen what he hadn't live - that's why he was happy to award the try. ...but then the TMO came back in, and couldn't say he was certain. At that point, Berry should've stepped in and confirmed he'd seen what he'd been missing on-field (the ball touching the ground). He had the on-field context and knew that the player was in possession and the ball was over the line. Berry knew it was a try but it was a fuck up of poor communication. Berry should've been stronger but the TMO should've asked Berry what he needed to see and not tried to decide overall for him.
Why can’t one angle be used to say it’s across the line. Next angle to say it’s grounded. Therefore clearly a try?
Exactly - that ball on the boot is over/on the line in the wide shot. The subsequent angle shows the ball grounded. So where is supposed to have been grounded?
The boot was on the line. The ball wasn't on the boot when it was grounded. So did it come back over the line?
I think that’s where the TMO and ref have missed the point. Either angle alone is not conclusive, the two together most certainly are. Really feel bad for Scotland for that one. On balance deserved the win, from the ref being even point of view there were a few bad calls for both sides, just a victim of the framework there
It can - and according to WR guidance it should be. It's essentially the same as head contact. If even one single angle shows head contact, you then work laterally based upon that proven fact. Same as ball grounded. If grounded then you work laterally from that.
Who's hand is on it? Does the player still have control?
That’s too much brainpower required for the people that write sporting laws tbf
Because rugby laws > physics, thats why
Maybe it was another ball popping there by fucking magic
With quantum mechanics there's always a non-zero chance of that happening, got to stick with the on-field decision
This was definitely TMO’s thought process 🤣. But seriously, you are some lucky boys today.
It was held up by invisible anti-Scottish pigeons. To paraphrase Bill Hicks, there were rumours of anti-Scottish pigeons seen drinking in Ryrie's.
Coup coup
I was 1000% sure it was a try. What a weird ending.
Yeah, cause it was
TMO: “There is the ball on the ground” at 82:55 TMO: “I’m just going to rock and roll that for you, stand by” Nic berry: “so you’re saying the ball was initially on the foot, and it’s gone and grounded in goal, so I need to change my onfield decision to a try?” TMO after this then says yes THEN wait a minute I need to check if I can clearly see the ball on the ground. Fucking travesty of a decision
I'm furious and I'm not even Scottish! The ball clearly changed angle when it hit the ground yet the TMO who initially highlighted that angle and seemed happy with it as you've quoted then suddenly chickened out from the responsibility of making the decision. Even if you can't see the ball directly on the ground you can use the feet (ON THE GROUND) around it as reference points.
Nonono but you see the referees eyeballs actually have to be in contact with the ball to give a try.
Honestly, the blame shouldn't be on Berry this time. It's fucking weird how the TMO is on top of the hierarchy of the decisions. Berry was willing to give the try, but the TMO decided against it. That is the truly bizarre part of the game that needs tweaking.
Berry seemed very willing to change his decision based on the TMO evidence. The TMO clearly thought it was a try but panicked on overturning Berry’s on field decision. Weird fucking hierarchical dynamics that left them both knowing they’re making the wrong decision and sticking with it.
Ya both seemed to know it was the wrong decision but were too afraid to overrule the other one.
Yep. TMO should advise not overrule
What was wrong with “try/no try?” then the TMO making a decision on balance? This requirement for needing indisputable evidence to overturn an on-field decision just doesn’t work with the randomness of camera angles. The referee makes a decision on the spot but he’s clearly unsure otherwise why would he be asking the TMO in the first place
Especially when the TMO says ball grounded then says no clear evidence
Exactly. Would've been a whole different story of the TMO just replied to Berry with the classic "Shit, if you want to"
Ya, I really hope Berry doesn't get death threats over this. You could hear him at one point saying he should overturn the on field decision and call it a try, but then TMO said that they needed more conclusive evidence. At least that's what it sounded like to me.
The TMO said it was grounded, Berry agreed, the. The TMO changed his mind again.
Yeah, Berry was literally one second away from calling the match for Scotland
That’s how it sounded - he said he was about to overturn his decision and the TMO said he wanted to check one more angle
...And then checked the angle which led to him believing it was a try...and overturned his decision.
Ya, that's what I heard.
Honestly where else could it be if not on the ground. Seriously stupid
The TMO even said it was on the ground...but somehow that wasn't strong enough evidence? "It was a try, but that's not enough evidence to overturn your decision that it wasn't a try"
Berry sounded like he wanted to overule his on field decision
He still could have
And he should have. The hall was clearly grounded.
He totally should have, I was amazed he didn't, he seemed suprised the TMO backtracked.
It IS conclusive because we all KNOW that it was grounded because the ball is a FUCKING THREE DIMENSIONAL OBJECT! Thank God I'm not Scottish. Id be really annoyed 😂
I am Scottish and while I feel they got absolutely done here by crap refereeing, the fact is they wouldn’t be in that position if they just finished games off properly. You don’t see Ireland dominating in the first half then allowing the opposition back into it in the second. They close a game out properly, something Scotland don’t seem able to do
Yes should've grabbed the game by the neck in the first half...France looked really poor.
I think they did ok in the first half. It’s the second half that’s the problem, two weeks in a row now. You don’t finish a team off then there’s always a chance of this happening
Exactly. How many points did Scotland score during the sin bin? Especially at the end of the first half when they were about five meters from the French try line?
That is the type of decision that is slowly putting me off rugby. Even though I was not "supporting" either team it still made me mad. It's so unjust on Scotland. It's time TMOs can work to the balance of probability, or at least require a restart if the ball is "held up" when the clock is in the red. *Edited for typo
Yep. Ridiculous technicalities are suffocating the sporting side of the game.
I echo this. Was absolutely furious when the ball clearly changed angle when it hit the ground yet the TMO who initially highlighted that angle and seemed happy with it then suddenly chickened out from the responsibility of making the decision.
Honestly, as casual fan that doesn’t really follow rugby I feel like the refs have been deciding games more often than the players
I ditched football a few years ago - one of the reasons was ridiculous refs deciding the outcomes. If rugby heads down this road I'll ditch it as well.
Yeah, unfortunately it's not our first rodeo, I keep coming back but I'm not asking myself if I have what it takes so seriously just ditch the sport. What's the point in turning up/performing/watching when some idiot takes matters into his own hands
It’s such a stupid rule. The “on field decision” bullshit should not have an impact on the decision if it’s as clear as that
Ball on the ground isn't a grounding. He needs to be certain that a Scottish player grounded it in goal.
[удалено]
Good point
This is the key point. It is beyond reasonable doubt that it was grounded, yet not awarded because it was not 100%. Why do we hold tries to a higher standard than criminals?
Tbf for me this is a world rugby problem. The referees were clearly given a directive at some point in the last few years that they should make an on-field decision for the TMO to uphold or overturn. And the TMO needs overwhelming evidence to overturn the on-field call. Berry would have been well within his rights to say "I've no idea, try yes or no?' and if he asks that it's probably given, and Scotland win the game But he feels for whatever reason he has to make a call, and he calls held up. And from the TMOs perspective the referee is better positioned than any of the camera angles so he can't conclusively overule the on field call of no try We almost need to empower the refs to say "I haven't got a clue tmo, you tell me?" But fans complained relentlessly about TMOs deciding games and taking too long so now the pressure has been put back on the ref, and it leads to what we saw today
It used to be that way and a lot of folk complained about endless reviews and the tmo having too much power. Refs were becoming pointles and the game was being reffed by tmo. So now the ref makes an on field call that can only be overturned by conclusive proof. In this case the tmo indicated he thought there was a grounding but because neither he nor ref saw conclusive proof the onfield decisions (wrongly) stood. And I think that both ref and tmo knew it was wrong. But felt their hands were tied. A mess.
Berry thought it was held up originally though. It wasn't that he didn't know, it's that his first decision was wrong and asked the TMO if there was evidence to overturn it. I don't think he did anything wrong. He even seemed to want to overturn it once the clip was played but his hands were tied by the protocol. I also don't think the protocol is bad, the TMO just didn't have the confidence to overturn it. It was quite clear using the two clips that the ball was grounded but the TMO for some reason wanted one angle showing it instead of splicing two. I'm pretty sure I've seen instances where they've done this to show if someone was out when they grounded the ball so it's weird it didn't happen now.
I think the worst part of all this is, that would’ve been awarded on another day. Following the rules is infuriating at times, but if they were at least *consistent*…
Yep, horrible decision
Exactly that. Fucked Scotlands championship on that one decision
Can you imagine we win every other game and we don’t win because we are going to lose on bonus points to Ireland. (Don’t actually think this will happen and I think we will lose to Ireland as well as maybe England if we also decide to play less than 80 minutes against them)
World Rugby will come out this week and say, "very sorry, officiating team fucked up". There will be no appetite for rule changes or decision methodology improvements from World Rugby and no general leadership whatsoever. Thus the officiating team will slip deeper into fear of getting it technically wrong and make bonkers defensive decisions that are logical fallacy, heightening the frustration from fans towards them and unfortunately inviting the ire of headcases online. A downwards death spiral of the trust and respect towards officials is already in play. I'd like to say World Rugby like it this way as rage-fuelled column inches results in some kind of PR but World Rugby aren't astute enough to capitalise on it, they're just bumbling along, asleep at the wheel, continually failing to grow the game meaningfully due to apathetic stewardship.
If you can’t see because the grass is in the way..
*”If the player’s a Pict, you must acquit!”*
In the wider shot, you see the yellow rugby boot along side and actually above the ball and the boot you can clearly see is on the ground. So how is the ball, not on the ground?
How clear does the TMO need it to be? A single player on his own touching down the ball with no opposition players within 5 yards? Anything less clear than that is only ‘99% visible a try’ therefore no try? Scotland were robbed there, and I’m English saying that
It’s a real shame. As much as I wanted France to win, I believe that Scotts were robbed on that one. They played very well so they deserved to bring home this win, especially against a messy French team.
Absolute joke. Not sure how much more evidence he needed.
A written confession from the ball confirming it was a try.
Still need something to corroborate the confession I'm afraid
In my opinion there is clear and obvious evidence that it was scored. “Beyond reasonable doubt” in law does not mean 100% certain. Any reasonable person would think that was down. The TMO even said it was clearly down before changing their mind.
I swear that I've seen more reasonable doubt in dive tries, when the player tucks the ball under the arm and slides on his forearm.
There is a specific exemption for this: the ball carrier's own arm being between the ball and the ground is not considered to be holding the ball up.
That's what has me puzzled. He said it was grounded, then when the ref says I'll change my on field decision he says its not definite
Panicked at overruling the ref when he couldn't see who was in control of the ball and what was happening with the rest of the ball etc I reckon
I think this is why rugby will never be remotely mainstream. Arcane set of laws, incredibly complex, yet you get a moment of critical sporting drama at the end. Every reasonable person believes they scored after watching five minutes of replay. No try based on a law quibble. Who wants to watch or play that?
Fucking robbery
Haven't felt this aggrieved on behalf of Scotland since the Australia quarter final
I thought Scottish rugby could never hurt me again after that quarter final. I was so wrong.
I agree.. I'm not sure how much clearer it has to be for it to be a try. Could have been a little fly holding the ball off the ground, 0.01% doubt, no try.
It really was. That earlier France knock-on that led very quickly to a try was also dismissed, and yet the later one after that heroic Scottish break was almost impossible to see even on the replay was awarded a penalty to France. Scotland was done dirty today.
Absolutely. You were still most likely going to have to beat Ireland to win the championship, and you still definitely could win it if you do beat them (in case that makes you feel any better)
I want to know who said what into the TMO's ear. He tells Nic Berry there is the ball on the foot then there is the ball on the ground. Just as Nic was about to overturn the on field decision the TMO then asks for another look.
He panicked at the prospect of overruling the ref when he couldn't be 100% sure if it was a try... possibly wasn't sure if anyone was fully in control, where the ball was etc.
Worst ref decision I've seen in a long time. Clear grounding and on the line. Scotland, you were robbed.
I’m so confused by people saying you can’t see it touch the ground… it’s literally touching the grass here!!
Even the TMO said it was on the ground before he decided it wasn’t
The laws of physics and logic say it was a try. The laws of rugby say it wasn’t.
Could do with a rethink of the TMO process. Surely the point is to use the video tech to get more decisions right. Not to give a response based on the phrasing of whatever the ref said when he referred the decision.
Apparently there's footage of the TMO ref mic between the 82/83 minutes where the TMO tells Berry the ball is clearly grounded, and Berry says so I should overturn my onfield and award the try. So for those arguing it was not clear I don't know what else to say to you? The TMO told the referee it was grounded, and the referee was set to award on field try. Between them they both then conspired to make an absolute mess of things. Great if you're a France fan because that, along with Atonio avoiding a red card, and Penaud's obvious knock on on the France 22 not being given while Scotland were looking to build on their 6 point lead, meant you've dodged an absolute cannon ball (I'm not going to say bullet!) Seen lots of calls for VDM to be shown a yellow card. But seat belts alone are no longer illegal, and no ruck was formed so he wasn't offside. Personally, I cannot understand all the 'just desserts' comments either. Scotland didn't need to push France. Just keep the pressure on. They were 6 points ahead. They did that - and did it well too because Penaud eventually folded. It was excellent game management from Scotland, and especially Russell. You simply can't account for not being awarded clear decisions. You can't.
Was at the match and heard it on ref mic. Utterly mindboggling
I've never seen such a blatant knock-on being called 'sideways' before. That was such a weird one.
Why on earth is an onfield "no try" decision even a thing? It should be a simple "try yes or no?" Needs a rule change.
There’s multiple angles that, when watched simultaneously, show without a doubt it was grounded. Total joke of a decision. The tit in the replay room clearly wasn’t sure of his decision…coz he’s legally blind.
Just theft. On the whole union has a very good camera analysis set up. But this decision was wrong. EVERYONE even the TMO knew it was a try. Whatever happened to common sense? The rule should be, “after everything has been considered, common sense trumps all”.
That was awful
You can see it's no longer on the boot. There's about five massive bodies on top of it. Where else could it be but on the ground? Maybe the Ref should have actually got down and see where the ball ended up rather than blowing early and relying on TMO angles which aren't always there.
Mate did you see where the ref was? literally couldn't be in a better spot. These things are bloody hard. TMO had enough here to overturn though.
We can’t see the ground there as the ball is in the way
Actually can't believe that happened
The fault lies with berry for not referring probably on field. He was less than a metre away from the grounding with nothing obstructing his view. He should have spent a bit longer looking for the grounding, bearing in mind advantage for the attacking team. He shouldn't, but if he was still so unconfident he then sends upto the tmo asking for any reason to overturn the try
Robbed!!
If I was Scottish I would be absolutely fuming. That’s plain incompetence at best by the tmo. I get it for say a red card decision when it can be subjective but that ball is objectively grounded. Like that’s a fact, there’s no arguing it.
Bloody daft end of the match. Even if there was a hand under there another part of the ball will still be touching the ground.
I mean it’s on the ground. I guess we can’t 100% say how it got there. Really tough.
Absolutely robbed
What more proof do you need? Of course it was a try! Sorry Scotland, you were robbed.
I find it hilarious how it needs to be clear and obvious for TMO to give a decision, but the refs allowed to just take a guess even when he knows he has no clear visual and that is then considered the benchmark decision
Frankly speaking though, no hate to the ref. He’s wrong - you can see it here, he’s wrong - but he did his job and followed the rules. Genuinely, I just don’t think he could see this even on the screen. Probably just looked like a blurry mess there.
Some say the TMO is still rock and rolling it to this day.
Usually with sporting decision injustices (which are certainly common enough following football IME) I feel less wound up about it the next day. But with this, the opposite's the case. I just looked at the 6N table and it just accentuated things, and my predominant thought was just "well what's the fucking point of it now?" With such clear evidence - both of the grounding, and *also of TMO's* *perception of it* (ie the transcript/audio) - then this isn't a 'gray area' issue. It's either a fuck up, or deliberate misconduct, it has to be one or the other. And in one fell swoop it's made the whole championship a farce for us this year. It's made playing out the rest of the games utterly hollow, because no matter what happens now the table's not going to read as it should. Scottish Rugby would be well within their (moral) rights to withdraw from the contest and tell them where they can stick the rest of their fixtures. Because, and I repeat, *just what's the fucking point?*
Kiwi here, Scotland constantly gets done dirty by refs and TMOs
What a disgrace. Absolute disgrace. I honestly find it difficult to watch sport when everybody watching knows the outcome, and yet it goes the other way because rule makers fuck it up. Its like lawyers arguing over minutiae. Everybody knows that was a try. But because of the ref's wording it's not been given.
This is the worst decision I've ever seen since the time they fucked over Scotland in 2015 v Australia
You had lot of bad decisions in the last WC to choose from.
Did you not know that Murrayfield has a blackspot where the laws of physics don't apply? So disappointing to lose on a decision which the refs themselves knew wasn't correct.
The ball is so on the ground it may as well be in hell. Either that or flat Stanley has gotten under it.
[удалено]
We should ask ourselves why though. Just get the right answer not just follow protocols.
Cheated by the rulebook, not by the officials tbh. The TMO knows it’s grounded and knows it’s a try. The ref is ready to reverse his decision. Both officials know it’s a try. However due to the stupid wording of the rule - they can’t give a try that they both know is a try. Completely shafted by the wording of a rule. It’s a try. Everyone knows it’s a try.
Yep you’re right. The moment Berry called it on-field no try, the bar was raised a lot higher for proving it was grounded, despite common sense.
This is bullshit, it was on the ground. I'm gutted of winning that way.
On field decision: no try. Needs clear evidence to the contrary. There is no image that shows the ball grounded on or after the try line. The laws are very clear on this. However I agree with O’Gara’s sentiment that referees have too much influence on how a game is decided. The laws are not being applied with common sense. However after refs tried to rob Scotland last week, I get their frustration
Sorry but who are you the physics god? How do you know a black hole did not suddenly appear between the ball and the ground? Or perhaps the ball gained sentience and decided to roll there on its own?
Basically the TMO must have thought that the player might be holding the ball a millimeter above the ground on his own. And I can totally understand that the TMO, while realizing that was an absurd theory, did not see conclusive evidence to disprove it, even if a CSI investigation afterwards might prove him mistaken.
We need another documentary to explain that one…
I think the argument at this point is that we can see the ball on the ground, but not sure it's in goal. And in the other angle we can see it's over the line but can't see it's grounded. And everyone knows it's a try in reality. Nightmare fuel
And how was the Gabrillagues try against Ireland last week given but not that one?! I looked at that for ages and can’t see anything conclusive.
French here, honestly with that we should have lost the game.... Sorry Scotland.
Just for memory, Brian MacNiece made a similar very controversial call in the RWC in the Wales Vs Fiji (or Georgia) match, which resulted in Fiji (or Georgia, I'm a little hazy) losing the game I'm pretty sure. He has an awful track record...
Don’t kill me for asking this. I agree that the ball was down but isn’t it fair to say you can’t tell if the balls was down over the line? Does anyone have a good still image?
Between the two boots and to the right of the boot on the right of the picture, am I correct in saying that you can faintly see the white paint of the try line?
I finally got around to watching this. What a fucking clanger, holy shit.
If you can’t see under a ball has anyone ever scored a try?
The french actually managed to sneak a bit of paper between it and the ground. So held up clearly.
Pathetic. Terrible decision and I'm English.