Rugby is on the way to Roland-Garros. Probably.
That famed tennis arena, in Paris’s 16th arrondissement, will host the much-discussed foul play bunker system for the forthcoming World Cup, unless there’s a last minute U-turn by the powers-that-be.
So, now is a good time to look at some of the nuts and bolts which are relevant to its introduction.
We saw it working perfectly last Saturday, when England captain Owen Farrell delivered one of his trademark high shoulders against Wales – yellow card from Nika Amashukeli, with upgrade to red from the bunker; it was not a difficult call. But let’s dig a little deeper, it’s not as easy as it looks.
The Counter Ruck: the rugby newsletter from The Irish Times
Unbreakable, a cautionary tale about the heavy toll top-level rugby can take
Jacques Nienaber: ‘It was never the case that Rassie and I didn’t enjoy Munster or Ireland’
Joe Schmidt factor makes Australia game special for Ireland and Andy Farrell
As the referee, his two assistants plus the TMO, set out for the match venue, the Foul Play Review Officer (FPRO), plus a supporting FPRO, will be bunkering down in the Bois de Boulogne.
They will review all dangerous foul play yellow cards, to determine whether or not they should be upgraded to red. Should the two FPROs find themselves not in agreement, the view of the primary FPRO will prevail.
The FPROs come from the TMO group, increased to seven in anticipation of this system, rotating between their usual role, and work in the bunker. It is a huge responsibility, way beyond their normal pay grade; they should be well rewarded for it. These decisions come with the maximum amount of pressure, and with sharply focused public and media attention.
With 48 matches to be played, the importance of staying mentally fresh will be a challenge for them as they make their way around the nine match venues spread throughout France.
Referees remain by far the most qualified and experienced to make red card calls but, with this system, World Rugby is moving to people who, naturally enough, are still getting their heads around deciding such vital high grade stuff.
I would guesstimate that more than half the selected TMO group have yet to make a bunker decision, not forgetting that the potential for error moves from the referee to the FPROs.
The bunker decisions will be based on intel supplied by a gold standard Hawk-Eye system, providing multi- and split screen replays; zoom, synchronised and simultaneous capabilities are available too, all operated by skilled technicians.
Only the most shocking fouls will see a straight red being handed out by the referee; these will become rarer than hen’s teeth – referees taking just a quick look at the replay screen to determine that the yellow card threshold has been met, then it’s over to the bunker. It’s a massive change, taking the referee completely out of red card decisions, which signals the end of a fundamental principle of rugby union.
The protocol doesn’t allow for downgrading a straight red, if we ever see one again, nor does it permit advising the match TMO that the bunker has picked up foul play which has been missed; with all that expensive equipment available the latter seems an odd omission.
The sole purpose of the bunker is to review ‘yellows’. Despite rumours to the contrary, an upgrade to red will not see the player replaced after 20 minutes, which does happen in the southern hemisphere.
The purpose is mainly to avoid lengthy stoppages while the referee team study multiple replays; and to achieve more accuracy, the bunker having plenty of time to decide correctly. The optics will also be better, as dangerous play will not be viewed repeatedly, although many will seriously lament no longer being able to follow the referee’s thought process in reaching his decision.
While the Farrell ‘red’ was a very easy call, others will be a lot more difficult. And let’s not imagine that the system is error free, it is far from perfect.
In the Super Rugby final, Ben O’Keeffe sent a very bad challenge to be reviewed, but the bunker failed to upgrade. However, the citing commissioner picked it up, and the outcome was a three-week suspension for the Chiefs’ Anton Lienart-Brown.
In South Africa v Argentina, Andrew Brace misread a very dangerous challenge by Juan Cruz Mallia on South Africa’s Grant Williams, who was poleaxed in the collision, and it took an age to remove him safely.
Brace may well have been applying an over-simplistic rule of thumb which referees have conjured up in recent times – if a player who is trying to effect a charge down succeeds in connecting with the ball, what happens next is immaterial, just a rugby incident.
Mallia did succeed, but then, airborne and turning his hip, he smashed into Williams’s head. No other official saw any reason to politely challenge the ref’s interpretation, it was all decidedly not good.
Again, this led to a citing and subsequent suspension. Of course it was a red-card offence, Law 9.11 is clear – “players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others”.
Formulaic rules of thumb are a very risky idea, and cannot replace referee judgment, or usurp the law.
In summation, there is clearly merit in the bunker proposal, but nonetheless a real concern exists that it may be coming just too soon, and that the World Cup should not be part of an important learning curve for TMOs, as they add the new FPRO role to their portfolio. Nevertheless, on balance and with, it seems, the approval of the vast majority of coaches, it is very likely to make its appearance.
As we wait for news, let’s wish all those heading for the bunker a successful tournament; they will certainly feel the heat. Tennis, anyone?
