Prepare to be angered and frustrated

This column is going to be about how refereeing decisions are likely to be the big issue of this year’s Vodacom Super 12, but hands up all of you who agree that France were the victims of a dreadful miscarriage of justice in their Six Nations match against Ireland at Lansdowne Road?

In what became the Scott Young Show, given the leading role played by the Australian referee in charge of the game, there was an inkling of what we can expect from a new set of interpretations that will impact on the Super 12.

The “stay-on-your-feet-or-be penalised” provision at tackles is going to be a source of anger and frustration and policing of obstruction, if applied strictly as the IRB wants, will be farcical.

To my mind Scott Young’s performance was an object lesson in everything that is wrong with refereeing.

First off – and this was not Young’s fault – Brian O’Driscoll’s try in the corner should not have been awarded.

In yet another video replay that showed the fallibility of the camera, there was doubt whether the Irish centre had managed to “place his hand on the ball with downward pressure while the ball was on the ground.”

The front-on view was inconclusive, but one of the side-on camera angles clearly showed that O’Driscoll was holding the ball to the side of his hand – not below it – and that he lost control of it in trying to get it down. He certainly did not have his hand on the ball – even momentarily – when it touched the ground. There was no question that he did not apply “downward pressure.”

That the try was awarded, by the fourth official Brain Campsall, is scandalous. The evidence of the video replays was inconclusive and the length of time he took to come to a decision was a clear concession that he could not be sure – in which instance the benefit of the doubt should have gone to the defending team.

For the telly ref to work properly a try must clearly have been seen to be scored or it should be disallowed. If there is still doubt it makes the whole process of employing TV footage utterly futile.

The other time a try-scoring incident was referred to the telly ref it was a clear case of Young shifting his responsibility. The French drove over the line, in control of the ball, and when the carrier went down to score the man with the best view of whether it was a try was the referee himself.

He was in a position to bend down and see what happened under the seething bodies and there was no need to ask for the assistance of the fourth official. That this try was awarded, after having been referred, was equally ludicrous because television replays did not actually show the ball being grounded. I believe it was a try, and Young was in the best decision to judge whether it was, but once it was put in the hands of Campsall I cannot see on what “evidence” he awarded a try.

These two incidents go to the core of some of the refereeing problems. Match officials are evaluated by a panel of observers according to a set of criteria and if they fall down in any areas – for instance a collapsed scrum earns them a mark of disapproval – they run the risk of being demoted.

That is why officials such as Scott pass on the responsibility of awarding tries rather than making the decision themselves and then being proved wrong.

And that is what will be the problem with the Super 12 this year. Outside interference.

Referees have been instructed to strictly apply the provision that “after a tackle any other player must be on his feet when he plays the ball,” and for the first few weeks this is going to play havoc with the ebb and flow of matches.

Players are going to battle to get out of the habit of the past few seasons of “bridging” over the ball but the biggest problem, to my mind, is going to occur at the 4th, 5th and 6th phases when attackers, arriving in greater numbers than defenders, are going to find themselves going over the ball through the force of their own momentum only to be penalised.

It is going to be very hard for players drilled to arrive at speed and clear out opponents lingering around the ball to suddenly learn to put on the brakes so that they don’t fall over their own man on the ground. Stand by to be infuriated.

Equally, the new provision made for obstruction.

I have seen the tape made by the IRB to illustrate what is deemed to be obstruction – no surprises that it features quite a lot of the Brumbies and Australia – and I can predict that, in the words of Zandberg Jansen, it’s going to lead to a “jôllie gemors.”

I happened to watch the video, when it was shown by a leading referee to one of South Africa’s Super 12 squads, and it was agreed among the players and their coaches that as many as 50% of the examples did not constitute obstruction.

Clever defenders, by making contact with attacking runners and throwing their arms in the air, are going to be able to milk the new provisions for penalties while it is going to be interesting to see how many breaks by a scrumhalf are allowed given that the No9 almost always sets off from behind a screen of forwards?

It all starts on Friday. My advice is to get yourself one of those sponge balls to be able to throw something at your TV screen to vent your anger without running the risk of causing great damage. I promise you, you’re going to need it!

PS: Don’t be too hard on the referees. They have to blow as they’re told, so perhaps the onus should be on players and coaches to get it right… quickly.