- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Most parents are very good liars.
OK, maybe that’s a bit harsh, let’s soften the impact by describing it as stories full of imagination.
As in, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus. They’re all real, right?
One of the biggest parental challenges then, is to know at what age do you tell your child the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Without breaking their hearts.
Over the ditch in NZ, we should add another story to this list of challenging truths – the infamous 2023 World Cup final TMO intervention that resulted in a disallowed All Blacks try.
Win a Ziggy BBQ for Grand Final day, thanks to Barbeques Galore! Enter Here.
Once upon a time, shortly after the final, in November 2023, the story begins on a NZ news website.
“World Rugby has privately acknowledged to the All Blacks that the ruling out of Aaron Smith’s try in the final was in fact outside the rules, but is refusing to publicly acknowledge that.”
“It was called back when TMO Tom Foley spotted a knock-on at a lineout, and referee Wayne Barnes then disallowed the try.”
Ardie Savea and New Zealand teammates talk to Referee Wayne Barnes during the Rugby World Cup final. (Photo by Hannah Peters/Getty Images)
Every now and again this private apology story is retold by NZ fans and journos when a TMO mistake was supposedly made, or a TMO got involved too many times during the game, or a TMO should have interrupted the game more often to check something (NZ, can you settle on a position please?)
Now, let me be very clear, I do accept a private apology was made.
When one reads the ‘TMO Protocol’, it is easy to understand why someone at World Rugby felt compelled to apologise, as the formal referral process on page three of the ‘TMO Protocol’ clearly refers to the immediate two phases of play: “Where match officials believe a clear and obvious infringement may have occurred in the immediate two phases of play leading to a try being scored, or in the preventing of a possible try from being scored.”
The TMO Protocol then lists several laws applying to the Formal Referral process.
Some of these laws are underlined, indicating the same law would also apply as a live referral, where any member of the T04 (team of four) is able to make an accurate call without having to formally refer to the TMO.
In other words, a live referral is not restricted to the two phase limit of a formal referral.
Given all clear and obvious knock-ons are underlined, does it mean the TMO was entitled to call play back to the knock-on as a live referral?
Well, probably not, given a very narrow interpretation (which I admit I didn’t grasp at first), when one reads the complete underlined section: “All clear and obvious knock-ons where the on-field team have awarded the scrum to the incorrect team to feed the ball.”
So, given the formal referral process only applies to the immediate two phases of play leading to a try, and the live referral for a knock-on is limited to a scrum feed for the incorrect team, this TMO intervention does indeed seem to be outside rugby’s laws, protocols and processes.
Well, let’s not jump to conclusions and issue apologies before reading the last page of the ‘TMO Protocol’, shall we?
But before we do so, a quick recap of this infamous incident.
1. A throw to the front of the lineout is caught cleanly by Brodie Retallick.
2. Whilst Brodie is still in the air, Eben Etzebeth grabs Brodie’s arm, interrupting the delivery of the ball to Ardie Savea.
3. Ardie knocks the ball on, but Barnes, unsighted, calls no knock on and play continues through more than two phases until a try is scored.
4. Before the conversion can be taken, the TMO calls the referee back to the lineout.
So let’s see how page five of the ‘TMO Protocol’, copied below applies to this incident:
At any stage of the game (i.e., not limited to within two phases prior to a possible scoring of a try) the following items of Law may be referred to the TMO by the TO4, but should be before the start of the next phase of play. It should be within, and relating to, the guiding principles as defined in Section 1.
Law 9: Foul play
All clear and obvious acts of foul play (excluding Law 9.19 “Dangerous Play in a Scrum”) may be referred up until the game restarts (for clarity purposes, this includes a lineout after a penalty kick, should footage only become available then) including but not limited to;
• Obstruction (where material affect is determined, and in line with the guiding principle of clear and obvious).
• Unfair play and repeated infringements.
• Dangerous play (where consideration should be given to possible processes contained within additional documents such as the Head Contact Process (HCP) document).
• Cynical play including intentional knock-ons.
• Issuing of yellow and red cards.
In summary, page five of the protocol allows any member of the TO4 to refer all clear and obvious acts of foul play (excluding Law 9.19) at any stage of the game (not limited to within two phases) until the game restarts.
The following step by step process is a valuable method in applying page five of the ‘TMO Protocol’ to the disallowed All Blacks try.
Referee Wayne Barnes. (Photo by Tom Jenkins/Getty Images)
1. Was there foul play at the lineout?
Yes. Eben grabbed Brodie’s arm whilst he was in the air.
Law 9.17 does indeed define this incident as foul play:
Dangerous play
17. A player must not tackle, charge, pull, push or grasp an opponent whose feet are off the ground.
Sanction: Penalty
2. Did the All Blacks gain advantage from the foul play?
No. Ardie knocked the ball on a second later.
From Law 7:
Advantage ends when:
c. The non-offending team commits an infringement before they have gained an advantage. The referee stops the game and applies the sanction for the first infringement.
3. Was the TMO entitled to call play back to the lineout?
Yes. All requirements on page five of the TMO Protocol apply.
Given foul play (law 9.17) triggered the TMO intervention, the TMO was not limited to two phases prior to a possible scoring of a try, and the next phase of play, the conversion, hasn’t taken place yet either.
After the decision, Barnes explained to Ardie (who almost certainly had the best view of the foul play):
“I agree with you that he’s played the man in the air. Ok, so that’s the first offence. But then it’s hit your hand and gone forward, so it’s a knock on. So it’s no try, but it will be your penalty back on the lineout.”
I have therefore no doubt that page five of the TMO Protocol allowed the TMO intervention to disallow the All Blacks try in the 2023 Rugby World Cup final.
So, when is the appropriate time to tell someone an uncomfortable truth?
Well, if they enjoy getting money for a tooth, and chocolates in April, and gifts in December, maybe never?
However, if your mate is the poor bugger at World Rugby who gave a private apology by mistake, and in the process created this scary monster TMO story? Have a private word with them.
And if you’re mates with an All Blacks fan or a rugby journo that keeps on repeating this (now busted) mythical story of an “unlawful” TMO intervention, send them the link to this article.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.