In a decidedly mixed performance with question marks all over the second half, particularly the failure to register a score of any variety in that period, Caelan Doris tried hard to play his part. As Joe McCarthy touched down, for what turned out to be the winning score, his captain was riding shotgun, in front of play, obstructing a potential defender.
Doris often sails close to the wind, and this one has led to several queries in my inbox. Was his involvement before, or after, the ball had been touched down; it’s a crucial question. It was tight, but my immediate view was that the try would be ruled out. However, none of the five match officials even considered that a check on the validity of the try was needed, which it was, whatever outcome would have been reached. It was a high, needless risk by Doris — McCarthy was not going to be stopped from that distance.
The incident got me thinking in general terms about referees and assistants. They are the on-field match officials, but they defer too often to the off-field officials on matters of foul play, including obstruction. Too many opt out, even if the offence is clear, and wait for the TMO to come in. So, if they miss or misread an incident, the offence goes unpunished. The bunker protocol has, apparently, been changed to allow it to support the TMO — an extra pair of eyes. But, above all, World Rugby need to address this issue.
The Counter Ruck: the rugby newsletter from The Irish Times
Connacht arrive to Aviva with strong team and high hopes
Fantastic Farrell hat-trick snatches win for Munster over 14-man Ulster
Irish Times Sportswoman of the Year Awards: ‘The greatest collection of women in Irish sport in one place ever assembled’
Right at the death Ireland were desperately defending when referee, New Zealander Paul Williams, whistled up what must have been the tiniest Argentinian knock-on. The visitors were not amused with the decision.
Ireland dominated the penalty count, managing to be pinged 13 times to Argentina’s six. That’s a total of 26 in the two matches this autumn. It’s an issue that needs to be sorted. Similar numbers would weigh very heavily in the Six Nations.
There were several foul play referrals to the bunker, all of which remained on yellow, with those decisions looking about right. But where are we with the 20-minute red card replacement? In the spring we were expecting a decision on it. Instead, World Rugby told us that a specialist group had been set up, and they would report with their recommendations at the November meeting; fair enough, not a bad idea at all.
That meeting was last Thursday, and we learned nothing except that the decision has been deferred. We remain in the dark and don’t even know whether or not the council were shown the group’s conclusions.
Whether or not there are multiple bunker referrals, or none, in the remaining matches, it’s difficult to see the purpose of the 20-minute red card. The decision is a matter of principle, not one that can be manoeuvred by a set of statistics. We can only speculate, and this is pure conjecture, that perhaps those in favour were unsure that their lobbying would carry the day, and the delay was based on having time to twist a few more arms. If Fine Gael leader Simon Harris doesn’t like the polls, he can’t change the voting date, there would be quite the stink at such an undemocratic move.
Have teams figured out Ireland's attack?
Also delayed, and still under review, is the question of replacements. No decision on the total numbers allowed, nor how they can be split between forwards and backs. This particular specialist group has surely also had plenty of time to finalise their thoughts, again it’s hard to see the benefit of another postponement.
The World Rugby Council assemble twice each year, undoubtedly at enormous cost. It’s not cheap to fly all 52 members to one location, put them up in luxurious hotels, wining and dining them in fine style. None of us should have any problem with that, we’d happily join in if we got the chance — provided, of course, that its planned business is completed. Even, (maybe “especially” is a better word) if the issues are divisive.
Twickenham and Paris saw real thrillers. Both matches were epic, but also ferocious, brutal contests, unlikely to have many mothers rushing out to buy boots for their children. The skill levels completely surpassed what we watched at the Aviva and the blinding pace across the back lines was electric — it’s unlikely that Ireland can match it. Any of the four teams involved would have made a lot of hay against us in that poor second-half performance.
Andrew Brace, handling England against South Africa, showed a welcome change in his communication, far less of it paid off. He displayed a confidence which has been missing on occasions, apart from a curiously hesitant penalty against Pieter-Steph du Toit. A good yellow card went to Gerhard Steenkampf for persistent infringements by the visitors, while Kurt-Lee Ardense was fortunate to avoid one for an arm pull in the air. Overall, though, this performance must become Brace’s template for future matches.
The one bugbear was his positioning, going perilously close to the breakdown he stayed there, at high risk of interfering with play or copping a serious injury. He could very usefully take a leaf out of Nika Amashukeli’s playbook. In France against New Zealand the Georgian’s breakdown positioning and movement should be the benchmark for every referee.
Any aspiring elite referee must get himself a recording of this match, there is a lot to learn from it. It was pretty much a masterclass.
