Television match officials, good or bad?

Tell me I would like to know..........should they stay or should they go?

There has been a lot of discussion recently about the use of the TMO in rugby. Many questions have arisen, such as: is it used too often? Are referees scared to make a decision on impulse? Should the video ref be forgotten?

This comes in the light of the Wales New Zealand game, where referee Craig Joubert went upstairs, not once, not twice but three times. Of which, every decision came back ‘No Try.’

Conrad Smith who crossed the line in the 62nd minute was positive he scored, despite the referee’s decision: “I thought I grounded the ball but who knows? I got up thinking they'd called a forward pass because that's all the Welsh fellas were telling me, so I didn't celebrate then they went upstairs... I'm not a fan of the video ref,"

"I'd love refs just to make the call. That's a big part of rugby. But there's a fair argument if they're big calls in test matches and video refs can help them, maybe there's a case for that but it's out of my hands."

Games can be won and lost based on a referee’s decision. So much pressure is on a referee within a game, when faced with a decision balanced between a match winning try or match saving tackle to prevent one, I don’t blame them for using the ‘cushion’ of the video replay.

Currently, I feel sorry for referees in sport, they are always wrong in some one’s opinion. Warren Gatland has slated Joubert for missing Dan Carter’s high tackle on Martin Roberts. Alex Ferguson in football seems to loathe referees currently. Any decision a referee makes, is always criticised. So how can anyone expect a referee to confidently make a 50/50 call?

There has been some criticism that the video ref was used excessively in the Welsh game. Why have the technology, if you will moan about it being used? It’s not like any of the game is being lost, the clock stops until a decision has been made. So I say; fair play to a referee who wants an extra opinion or a slower version of events to help make a decision.

I feel that if the video ref is scrapped, it will be quickly requested to make a return. Players and managers won’t have realised what they had until it was lost.

Possibly we could go down the route of Tennis and Cricket where there is a restriction on the amount of times Hawk-Eye can be used. However, the technology used in rugby is not as advanced as Hawk-Eye. Computer systems track the flight of a ball and make a very accurate estimation of where the ball landed. In rugby, the decision goes to another human being who may be exposed to different interpretation and could make an error under pressure.

I’m not saying Hawk-Eye is flawless but it is far more accurate that human judgement. It’s fair to say though, Hawk-Eye would have no place in rugby, it wouldn’t work. So if the technology for referees was to be adapted, something pretty sophisticated would have to come up.

Until then however, I say to referee’s, use the technology available, it’s there and it should be used.