This has been the question many fans and rugby figureheads alike have been asking after the controversy surrounding the ending of the Australia vs. Scotland World Cup quarter-final, which saw Australia win it through a penalty with virtually the last kick of the game. The referee at the centre of the controversy was South African Craig Joubert who has been lambasted my some but praised by others, but the question is was he right with that crucial call? That decision The call which resulted in the Australian penalty, that allowed Australia to claim a 35-34 win over Scotland, was given from what I understand as a deliberate offside with Finn Russell (fly-half) catching the ball. However replays show that the ball game off an Australian player last before the catch, which left many to question why the TMO (Television Match Official) was not used. Although according to the rules (which are not that clear) the TMO was not allowed to be used for that phase of play, which former pro Lawrence Dallaglio questioned on Twitter emphasising the point that protocol should not matter when it involves such a crucial decision. I would echo Dallaglio’s point as that if the TMO was used to check that decision would anyone have questioned that? Probably not. Other key decisions I do feel that the outcry mainly from the Scots is not solely on that decision as about a minute earlier Stuart Hogg was crashed into late after kicking the ball, which is something that could’ve and should’ve been referred to the TMO which Joubert failed to do so. Had that happened the next phase of play which Australia were awarded the penalty would not have occurred. Joubert was also questioned over the sin-binning of Sean Maitland for an alleged deliberate knock on which rubbed further salt into the Scottish wounds. Then to top off the game Joubert jogged off the pitch at the end leaving his match officials to face the music themselves. Personal opinion My personal opinion is had Joubert only made the error at the end, to which he did follow the letter of the law then not much fuss would have been made of it and everyone would’ve eventually accepted the decision. The fact of the matter is there was a number of errors in his performance which showed inconsistency in his display and let’s not forget he was heavily criticised after refereeing the 2011 final between New Zealand and France to which he failed to give France a number of penalties. Which brings me on to my final point is that should Joubert have been allowed to ref the game anyway from the point of view that he referee’s in the Super 15 and refs the majority of the Australian’s week in, week out, so he would have a better understanding of their game compared to the Scottish players game, all of which could lead to more leniency. I’m not saying that he would purposely be unfair, I’m making the point that should someone be allowed to ref a game who refs in one of the Country’s national leagues? An equivalent situation in football would see someone like Mike Dean ref an England game. Obviously I know Joubert is South African as opposed to Australian but it may have been more suitable and would’ve saved World Rugby extra grief had they put for arguments sake Frenchman Jerome Garces or Romain Poite in charge. This may be something the governing body may look at in the future and from their point of view you can understand the referee appointments as they want to have the best refs in place for every game. Anyway it will be interesting to see what consequences if any Craig Joubert faces and whether World Rugby change protocol on when the TMO can be used during matches, maybe an exceptional circumstance rule perhaps?
0 Comments
|