Henderson's red card overturned - those damned TMOs.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 2:51 pm

Basically creating this thread for Chunky so he can lay into TMOs when they make dodgy calls.....
Don't pull your punches this time Chunky!

On a more serious note though, like I've always asked - what happens in these cases behind the scenes???

Effectively - the panel has come out and said 'Errrr that was a wrong call'.

So, how many folks on here work in jobs where they do something wrong and the bosses shrug and say 'meh!'.

Not many I imagine.

Are refs and officials held to a high enough standard, that makes the tradition of respecting the ref easy to maintain?

If I sound like I have an agenda - it's probably because I do.

Do Nigel Owens or Kevin Beggs get penalised anyway for their incorrect call, do they at least get a 'refresher course' on this area of play. Or does nobody say anything, and allow them to continue earning a salary without question??

by Standulstermen Wed 13 May 2015, 2:54 pm

They said that Nigel didn't have the benefit of watching it up close as they did. Not sure how they can argue the TMO didn't though. Anyway it's a split second thing. I presume if panels found that they kept having to overturn decisions of one official then it would be looked at but one incident hardly needs to be examined

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 2:55 pm

Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 2:55 pm

BOOM!

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 2:57 pm

It was Owens that made the call. I was surprised actually as Owens is usually pretty measured - by contrast Barnes would have red carded the whole Ulster team including the bench.

Yellow card would have done it so think the panel have got it right.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:01 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

Can't believe you would go and hypocritically defend the TMO in this case Chunky.Especxially since Kevin Beggs is a Leinsterman and is clearly biased with sour grapes against Ulster!!!

Look! We have matching tin hats now! laughing

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 3:01 pm

There wouldn't have been a yellow card.

Owens gave Henderson a red card for leading with the head. The panel watched the footage and saw he didn't lead with the head.

Ergo, no card.

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 3:03 pm

clivemcl wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

Can't believe you would go and hypocritically defend the TMO in this case Chunky.Especxially since Kevin Beggs is a Leinsterman and is clearly biased with sour grapes against Ulster!!!

Look! We have matching tin hats now!

But was it Marshall Kilgore? TELL ME - WAS IT MARSHALL KILGORE?

I NEED TO KNOW AND THERE IS LITERALLY NO WAY I CAN FIND OUT MYSELF!!!

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:05 pm

clivemcl wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

Can't believe you would go and hypocritically defend the TMO in this case Chunky.Especxially since Kevin Beggs is a Leinsterman and is clearly biased with sour grapes against Ulster!!!

Look! We have matching tin hats now!

Strange comment.

The TMO and the referee for once got it right in Belfast. But this time the unfortunate losers will be Glasgow not the the opposition on the night.

A flying headbutt isn't 0 weeks.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:05 pm

any footage of this incident?

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:09 pm

Don Alfonso wrote:There wouldn't have been a yellow card.

Owens gave Henderson a red card for leading with the head. The panel watched the footage and saw he didn't lead with the head.

Ergo, no card.

Entering the ruck unbound, late and off the feet is still a penalty and there was contact with O'Mahoney's head with Henderson arm. The panel correctly ruled that Henderson didn't lead with the head but would be amazed if there was no card as it was pretty reckless and dangerous.

It looked worse in slow motion though so surprised someone as experienced as Barnes overreacted with the red card.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:10 pm

LondonTiger wrote:any footage of this incident?

https://twitter.com/KMcGillicuddy86/status/597071791547359232

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:11 pm

https://youtu.be/t0nPg_HVAxc?t=5299

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 3:11 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
clivemcl wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

Can't believe you would go and hypocritically defend the TMO in this case Chunky.Especxially since Kevin Beggs is a Leinsterman and is clearly biased with sour grapes against Ulster!!!

Look! We have matching tin hats now!

Strange comment.

The TMO and the referee for once got it right in Belfast. But this time the unfortunate losers will be Glasgow not the the opposition on the night.

A flying headbutt isn't 0 weeks.

No, Kingspan TMOs NEVER get it right - you've been quite clear on that.

Three Welshmen said it wasn't a flying headbutt.

I'm going to call it, Chunky - you just hate Ulster, in the most tedious fashion.

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:13 pm

This probably doesn't merit it's own thread. We all need to just calm down...

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:13 pm

Don Alfonso wrote:

No, Kingspan TMOs NEVER get it right - you've been quite clear on that.

Three Welshmen said it wasn't a flying headbutt.

I'm going to call it, Chunky - you just hate Ulster, in the most tedious fashion.

Please don't lie.

I've said that Ulster frequently get born and bred Ulstermen on TMO duty. Which is true, and therefore the incorrect decisions made by them have to be called into question.

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 3:17 pm

I'm done, Notch.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:17 pm

Actually, now that I've said it jokingly - it does sound on the footage as though Owen's attention was brought to the incident by the Leinster TMO!

Chunkys having a negative affect on me!

by **LondonTiger** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:17 pm

Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:18 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Don Alfonso wrote:

No, Kingspan TMOs NEVER get it right - you've been quite clear on that.

Three Welshmen said it wasn't a flying headbutt.

I'm going to call it, Chunky - you just hate Ulster, in the most tedious fashion.

Please don't lie.

I've said that Ulster frequently get born and bred Ulstermen on TMO duty. Which is true, and therefore the incorrect decisions made by them have to be called into question.

Noooooooooooooo.....

I think you'll find the incorrect decisions made by ALL OFFICIALS have to be called into question - the point of my thread which has so far gone ignored!

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:19 pm

Still propping it up.

http://www.pro12rugby.com/statzone/specsavers_fair_play_league.php#vMEi2cWsREluFIJR.97

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:21 pm

LondonTiger wrote:Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

No I disagree - Bai's was much worse imo - there was clear contact with the head by Bai, which to be honest looked pretty blatant.

Henderson made a marginal contact with his forearm, which looked accidental and reckless at worst.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:23 pm

rodders wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

No I disagree - Bai's was much worse imo - there was clear contact with the head by Bai, which to be honest looked pretty blatant.

Henderson made a marginal contact with his forearm, which looked accidental and reckless at worst.

Not to mention the moving target. When Henderson began his charge, ~~Murrays~~ (not Murray, who was it?) head was down and upper back was the target. Murray then pulled back, bringing his head up for Henderson to make contact. Contact with an arm first and foremost.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:28 pm

clivemcl wrote:Contact with an arm first and foremost.

He does not make contact with his arm first. If you can see that on the footage - show me a still of conclusive evidence.

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:30 pm

clivemcl wrote:
rodders wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

No I disagree - Bai's was much worse imo - there was clear contact with the head by Bai, which to be honest looked pretty blatant.

Henderson made a marginal contact with his forearm, which looked accidental and reckless at worst.

Not to mention the moving target. When Henderson began his charge, ~~Murrays~~ (not Murray, who was it?) head was down and upper back was the target. Murray then pulled back, bringing his head up for Henderson to make contact. Contact with an arm first and foremost.

Ronan O'Mahoney I think it was.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:32 pm

rodders wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

No I disagree - Bai's was much worse imo - there was clear contact with the head by Bai, which to be honest looked pretty blatant.

Henderson made a marginal contact with his forearm, which looked accidental and reckless at worst.

Oh Bai's was worse, but for me Henderson's looks between the two incidents I describe. Following the directive from ~~IRB~~ WR I am not surprised it was deemed a red on the field of play.

by Don Alfonso Wed 13 May 2015, 3:35 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:Still propping it up.

http://www.pro12rugby.com/statzone/specsavers_fair_play_league.php#vMEi2cWsREluFIJR.97

Another wee dig at Ulster that is irrelevant to the substantive issue here.

Proven my point nicely, Chunky.

NOW I'm done.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:41 pm

Don Alfonso wrote:

NOW I'm done.

If only.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:45 pm

Chunky, what is your opinion on my OP? Do you think TMOs and official are held to account for the calls they make?

I wonder if they get fined in some way, or told off, or at lease get told what they need to brush up on. How often do they get continued training for their roles?

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:48 pm

clivemcl wrote:Chunky, what is your opinion on my OP? Do you think TMOs and official are held to account for the calls they make?

I wonder if they get fined in some way, or told off, or at lease get told what they need to brush up on. How often do they get continued training for their roles?

I'm sure they are assessed and given feedback. I'd hope so. The players get suspended. The referees should at least get a rap on the knuckles.

by clivemcl Wed 13 May 2015, 3:51 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
clivemcl wrote:Chunky, what is your opinion on my OP? Do you think TMOs and official are held to account for the calls they make?

I wonder if they get fined in some way, or told off, or at lease get told what they need to brush up on. How often do they get continued training for their roles?

I'm sure they are assessed and given feedback. I'd hope so. The players get suspended. The referees should at least get a rap on the knuckles.

Agreed! And I'm sure we have plenty we DO agree on. No hard feelings from me - tis only the internet!

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:53 pm

clivemcl wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
clivemcl wrote:Chunky, what is your opinion on my OP? Do you think TMOs and official are held to account for the calls they make?

I wonder if they get fined in some way, or told off, or at lease get told what they need to brush up on. How often do they get continued training for their roles?

I'm sure they are assessed and given feedback. I'd hope so. The players get suspended. The referees should at least get a rap on the knuckles.

Agreed! And I'm sure we have plenty we DO agree on. No hard feelings from me - tis only the internet!

thumbsup

etc

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 3:56 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
rodders wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:Not too dissimilar to the incident that saw Seremaia Bai sent off at the weekend in the AP. Mind also similar to the incident that saw Billy Vunipola cited but cleared a few weeks ago.

No I disagree - Bai's was much worse imo - there was clear contact with the head by Bai, which to be honest looked pretty blatant.

Henderson made a marginal contact with his forearm, which looked accidental and reckless at worst.

Oh Bai's was worse, but for me Henderson's looks between the two incidents I describe. Following the directive from ~~IRB~~ WR I am not surprised it was deemed a red on the field of play.

I think it was dismissed as being a red because of a technicality; he was sent off for leading with the head and they've used extreme close-ups that weren't available to the TMO to establish that he actually makes contact with his arm first, which would tally with the defence presented by the play and Ulster than he intended to make contact with his arm.

Note they don't exonerate him of foul play. I've been consistent in saying it was at least a penalty and I don't think I or any other Ulster fan could argue too much with a yellow card either. But I'm happy as I think a fair conclusion has been reached; he was sent off for leading with his head into another player and I don't think that was what happened.

It would be a bit different if it happened in the first few minutes, but the timing of the card in the 73rd minute means that there wasn't much disadvantage to the ref and TMO getting the colour of the card wrong other than the potential citing. A fair result.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 3:57 pm

Notch wrote:

I think it was dismissed as being a red because of a technicality; he was sent off for leading with the head and they've used extreme close-ups that weren't available to the TMO to establish that he actually makes contact with his arm first,

Where did you hear this?

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:01 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Notch wrote:

I think it was dismissed as being a red because of a technicality; he was sent off for leading with the head and they've used extreme close-ups that weren't available to the TMO to establish that he actually makes contact with his arm first,

Where did you hear this?

It's in the BBC report on their report

However, the committee concluded that Henderson's initial contact with his opponent "had not in fact been with his head but with his arm".

It said it viewed the incident in close-up, adding that referee Nigel Owens had not been able to do this at the time.

The committee "having viewed the footage and listened to representations by and on behalf of Mr Henderson, decided that the act did not warrant a red card".
"The Disciplinary Committee imposed no sanction on the player, who is free to resume playing immediately."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32697295

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:02 pm

Notch wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:
Notch wrote:

I think it was dismissed as being a red because of a technicality; he was sent off for leading with the head and they've used extreme close-ups that weren't available to the TMO to establish that he actually makes contact with his arm first,

Where did you hear this?

It's in the BBC report on their report

However, the committee concluded that Henderson's initial contact with his opponent "had not in fact been with his head but with his arm".

It said it viewed the incident in close-up, adding that referee Nigel Owens had not been able to do this at the time.

The committee "having viewed the footage and listened to representations by and on behalf of Mr Henderson, decided that the act did not warrant a red card".
"The Disciplinary Committee imposed no sanction on the player, who is free to resume playing immediately."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32697295

I'm not seeing where "they've used extreme close-ups that weren't available to the TMO"

by marty2086 Wed 13 May 2015, 4:03 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
clivemcl wrote:
Chunky Norwich wrote:Terrible decision. Deserved 2 weeks.

But can't have the golden boy missing the semi.

Can't believe you would go and hypocritically defend the TMO in this case Chunky.Especxially since Kevin Beggs is a Leinsterman and is clearly biased with sour grapes against Ulster!!!

Look! We have matching tin hats now!

Strange comment.

The TMO and the referee for once got it right in Belfast. But this time the unfortunate losers will be Glasgow not the the opposition on the night.

A flying headbutt isn't 0 weeks.

Chunky there are more rewarding hobbies than talking censored

and trying to bait people

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:03 pm

It said it viewed the incident in close-up, adding that referee Nigel Owens had not been able to do this at the time.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:04 pm

Nigel Owens was the referee standing 6o yards from the screen. He did not see the incident close up. The TMO did.

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:05 pm

The TMO only sees the same angles as everybody else.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:06 pm

So the citing panel have viewed the exact same footage that we have in this thread. (no extreme close ups!!)

And somehow they have been able to determine that his arm hit first and not his head.

What extraordinary individuals they must be. Super powers.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:06 pm

Notch wrote:The TMO only sees the same angles as everybody else.

Exactly. Apart from Nigel Owens, because, as the report states he wasn't able to get a close up of the screen, as he was miles away.

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:08 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:So the citing panel have viewed the exact same footage that we have in this thread. (no extreme close ups!!)

And somehow they have been able to determine that his arm hit first and not his head.

What extraordinary individuals they must be. Super powers.

Well I thought it looked like the arm in the first instance. The only person who thought it was the head was Owens, who was 60 feet away, and made the red card call.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:09 pm

rodders wrote:

Well I thought it looked like the arm in the first instance. The only person who thought it was the head was Owens, who was 60 feet away, and made the red card call.

Looking at it again, the head makes contact a slpit second before the arm

https://twitter.com/KMcGillicuddy86/status/597071791547359232

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:15 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Notch wrote:The TMO only sees the same angles as everybody else.

Exactly. Apart from Nigel Owens, because, as the report states he wasn't able to get a close up of the screen, as he was miles away.

The panel state they were able to look at the incident in "close-up". That is not something the TMO can do. You can interpret the quote that way if you want, but when you're relying on twisting words to make a tenuous case it's probably time to step back and reflect on why you might think your view of a low-quality gif supersedes the view of a neutral panel with access to tools the TMO and the general public do not have.

by Chunky Norwich Wed 13 May 2015, 4:18 pm

Notch wrote:

The panel state they were able to look at the incident in "close-up". That is not something the TMO can do. You can interpret the quote that way if you want, but when you're relying on twisting words to make a tenuous case it's probably time to step back and reflect.

They say "close up" which was something the match referee was not able to do.

It s totally clear what that means. Using phrases like "extreme close ups" and saying that they saw footage the TMO didn't see is 100% inaccurate.

The outcome is absolutely bullsh1t as the footage clearly shows that his head connects first.

by **Notch** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:19 pm

I disagree based only on that footage, which shows nothing of the sort, and am very amused at how much you want to believe the opposite. No doubt this further display of shamelessness will prompt a pithy one-word putdown Cool

by Sin é Wed 13 May 2015, 4:25 pm

rodders wrote:It was Owens that made the call. I was surprised actually as Owens is usually pretty measured - by contrast Barnes would have red carded the whole Ulster team including the bench.

Yellow card would have done it so think the panel have got it right.

Ian Davies managed to yellow card four Munster players in one game Very Happy

(and Leinster still lost).

by **rodders** Wed 13 May 2015, 4:26 pm

Were 3 of them Alan Quinlan?

by Sin é Wed 13 May 2015, 4:29 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Notch wrote:

The panel state they were able to look at the incident in "close-up". That is not something the TMO can do. You can interpret the quote that way if you want, but when you're relying on twisting words to make a tenuous case it's probably time to step back and reflect.

They say "close up" which was something the match referee was not able to do.

It s totally clear what that means. Using phrases like "extreme close ups" and saying that they saw footage the TMO didn't see is 100% inaccurate.

The outcome is absolutely bullsh1t as the footage clearly shows that his head connects first.

Welsh making sure that all Ulster's best players are on the pitch to help Ospreys try and win the league Smile

At this rate of going, Munster haven't a hope with their ref.

by Sponsored content