The outcry after Scotland’s gut-wrenching, heart-breaking last minute defeat to Australia has been quite astonishing. Sadly, the performance of the officials has been the focus of pretty much all the post-match chat, rather than any sensible analysis of one of the most compelling games of rugby I’ve ever seen.
It was a stunning occasion at Twickenham. Australia were superbly clinical, sucking in the Scottish defence before scoring four tries in the corner through backs Mitchell, Kuridrani and Ashley-Cooper, and adding another from a powerful rolling maul.
Scotland, though, scrapped and fought their way back into the game time and again in a manner entirely alien to those fans north of the border that have grown up on a diet of meek teams that have rolled over in the face of superior opposition. Vern Cotter has firmly thrown his hat into the ‘best coach in the world’ ring for what he has achieved with this side.
Of course, had Scotland won that final line-out as they should have, they would have held on for the win many felt they deserved. Conversely, had a couple more Australia conversions gone over, they would have been out of sight.
On such decisions and moments do rugby matches depend. The officials, by contrast, are not to blame for the result. But that does not mean they are exempt from reasoned criticism, just as players are after every performance.
Now, referee-bashing is unedifying at the best of times, and the lack of it in rugby is quite rightly one of the reasons why we uphold the sport as having good values. But it is not unfair to ask that referees be held to the same standards as players, and the performance of not only Joubert but his assistants and the TMO must come in for scrutiny.
Why, for example, did the TMO chime in early in the second half to upgrade a knock-on, to a deliberate knock-on and a yellow card, for Sean Maitland, but then remain silent late on in the game when Drew Mitchell clearly hit Stuart Hogg late?
It was an incident that was bizarrely missed by the on-pitch officials at the time, which at the very least deserved another look. This is exactly what we have the TMO for – to check incidents like this at the biggest, most important moments. When players and fans alike, who have both contributed to an amazing occasion, deserve the right decision to be made.
Fundamentally what we all want, and indeed what any sport needs to maintain a fair playing field, is consistency from the officials. If the 50/50 Maitland knock-on was deemed foul play and worthy of a yellow card, then how could Mitchell’s late hit possibly be worth anything less?
For all the controversy surrounding the other decisions, it is this inconsistency in the use of the TMO that grated the most, and it is something that has become an unwelcome theme at the tournament.
The late penalty was probably a 50/50 call, and had it been at a different juncture in the game, it would have gone largely unnoticed – in the heat of the moment, it is understandable that Joubert missed Phipps’ very minor involvement and even so, there seems to be plenty of debate about what the right decision really is.
On a slight tangent, does anyone really think that those occasions where a player is in front of the ball and plays it purely on instinct is worthy of a penalty? Surely playing something instinctively inherently implies that it is not deliberate – and the right sanction would therefore be a scrum for accidental offside.
The most talked-about moment, though, came on the final whistle when Joubert sprinted off the pitch and was down the tunnel almost before he had finished blowing it. Why did he feel the need to leg it off so quickly without so much as shaking the hands of the captains?
Many people have condemned the criticism and abuse of Joubert after the game, calling it ‘not rugby’ – but failing to shake hands with the captains or the players, who have just given their all for eighty minutes, is every bit as unsportsmanlike, and every bit as bad for the image of the game.
Referees have an incredibly tough job to do and can be excused the odd wrong decision, but scurrying off the pitch like that seemed an awful lot like an admission of guilt. Joubert has questions to answer.
On the balance of the match itself, Australia were good value for their win. They scored five tries and had another couple of conversions gone over – or had they not shot themselves in the foot with a dire exit strategy from their own half – the win would have been in the bag much earlier.
But that does not make this pill any easier to swallow for the Scotland players and fans. And it does not change the fact that the standard of officiating at Twickenham on Sunday evening was lower than it should have been for such a pivotal and excellent match.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
Good article. You almost feel like we’re down to either Owens or Barnes reffing to ensure a fair game … that’s pretty sad isn’t it? The thing is, the more forensic we get with TMOs and replays etc, and the bigger the stakes – the more fault-free we expect everyone to be. We’ve almost written off human error as unacceptable, – which is just unrealistic. I don’t know what the answer is but right now, it isn’t working. I can empathise with Scotland as they have never been that close to something that big before … but on the plus side, I think they will be in the future and they’ll only get better the more they do it. I do look forward to hearing from Joubert why he ran off the pitch though … I have a feeling there’s still more to be revealed about all of this yet.
Absolutely correct Jamie and particularly the unedifying abuse of the officials. Am I the only one confused by the law on this issue? If a player deliberately catches the ball in an offside position from one of his own players who has knocked it on it’s a penalty but not if he passed it in which case it’s a forward pass? I should know these things as an ex referee but suddenly I have become unsure as the difference (forward pass or knocked forward) could be very marginal particularly the much lauded skill of moving the ball across the backs with a quick push of the hands rather than catch and give.
There is a clear difference between retrieving a knock on from an offside position and a forward pass. For one the recipient starts behind the ball and the other the recipient starts from in front of it
No.18 Jon Welsh shows clear intent to tidy up the ball when he is blatantly offside which is what the penalty is given for
What is not clear to the ref at the time is what happens between Josh Strauss and Nick Phipps. In real time it looks like it bounced off Strauss accidentally but slow motion replays show that Phipps gets a hand to it.
The result was an incorrect call but given that he was not allowed to go to TMO an understandable one. I still felt he was quick to award the pen and should have consulted with the touch judge first, however the outcome would likely have been the same if he had.
Throughout the group stages everyone was moaning about TMO being used too much now it’s not enough. Make your minds up.
Much as I wanted Scotland to win, I’m afraid it was a correct call. A player who remains in an offside position and prevents the opposition playing the ball cannot be played back on side by the actions of an opponent (law 11.9). I’ve no idea where the idea that the ball touching Phipps affects this – it doesn’t.
Welsh was in an offside position as soon as Strauss knocked it on and effectively advantage to Australia was being played until Welsh caught the ball. Had Phipps knocked it forward, it would have been a different matter, but he didn’t, so it wasn’t.
My interpretation would be that it was Hardie who knocks the ball on. Phipps then tries to play the ball with Strauss’ shoulder clattering into Phipps’ hands, knocking the ball further forward where Welsh catches it.
Correct me if I’m wrong (and I think Phipps has now admitted trying to play the ball), but assuming it didn’t actually touch Strauss (and I don’t think it did) don’t Phipp’s actions automatically make Welsh onside?
In which case it should come back for the original knock-on and scrum Aus
Yes that is 100% correct however watching it real time without the benefit of video replays can you blame Joubert for not seeing Phipps hand touch the ball?
I certainly didn’t see it until the third angle slow mo
I can’t blame him for not seeing it. I can blame him for deciding he knew exactly what happened in a very confused situation.
In my view, he should have said that he couldn’t tell who had last touched it and stuck with the original knock-on.
It was a split-second decision to make but that’s why he’s paid the big(ish) bucks.
It is possible to moan about the TMO being used too much in some matches and still feel that it hasn’t been used enough in a completely different match.
I think, however, that it is the inconsistency in the same match that truly infuriates people. Eg. the TMO intervenes on a knock-on decision that had already been made in order to upgrade it to a card and a penalty and then, in the same match, completely fails to refer a very late and illegal tackle that must have been obvious to him.
Currently the TMO is used for foul play and tries. I see no reason that it couldn’t be extended to exceptional circumstances as well – such as a confused penalty call in the last few moments that can win or lose a match
There are rules around when and where the TMO can be called upon after that it is up to the officials on the day to determine if it should be used.
The reason the TMO could be called for earlier was to determine if if was a deliberate act of foul play worthy of a card. For the later knock on there was no risk of a sanction above a penalty so the officials were unable to refer it.
You either allow officials to call on TMO for offences other than try scoring or foul play (card or no card decisions) which will lead to officials referring almost everything or you accept that occasionally they are going to get marginal calls like this one wrong. I know which I prefer
The first knock on, the TMO was not called for. He called for the ref who had already given it as a straight knock-on
And my point about consistency did not refer to the final knock on / deliberate offside but to the late tackle on Hogg, which the somehow the TMO completely missed.
As an aside, it has just occured to me that if a deliberate knock-on is foul play, then why is deliberate off-side not foul play?
Because you can be carded for deliberately knocking on the ball in a try scoring situation, you can’t be carded for offside at a knock on. The reason you can TMO check foul play is solely to decide if further sanctions are required
The TMO has the right to highlight things he has seen to the ref so it was bad that the TMO missed the late shoulder on Hogg (no arguments there)
So even if a very deliberate off-side stopped a try being scored, you couldn’t card the player for doing so?
In theory yes but this was clearly not a try scoring opportunity and I feel you are getting a bit facetious now
Good article ,well written and covering all aspects. You have said it all.I myself , having lived in South Africa for many years was always a great admirer of Joubert. I had thought however,that over the last couple of years his performances have been dropping off. I also thought another very good South African referee Jonathan Kaplin, performances leading up to his retirement were also flawed in many of his games. It will be interesting to see if Joubert is allocated any of the upcoming remaining games in RWC.I hope not and hope he also now retired!
It’s a fragile situation – if you make referees more accountable for decisions, then you’ll inevitably scare some away from the job. I’m all for making them explain decisions and punishment if it’s required, but think it’ll only have a detrimental effect in the long-term.
However, professional rugby has now reached a point now where we need that big c word that’s mentioned so often. As ST holders will no doubt attest to, the inconsistent standard of officiating in the Premiership over the past 10 years is infuriating and it so often has a big impact on a game’s outcome – which is fundamentally wrong.
Maybe the problem lies within the RFUs and the way they attract, train (and maybe pay) refs? With all the money in the game now, perhaps there needs to be more resources put in to this aspect of it?
I feel that criticism of Joubert scuttling off is misguided and based on inference. He may simply have had a full bladder! The half had been going a long time, what with all those TMO interventions. In fact, that may be why he didn’t ask the TMO to show him the pivotal Phibbs touch ;)
Owens for the final.
Undoubtedly. Although funnily enough he is not as highly rated in the SH as he is in the NH
I think I’m in the minority of not wanting Owens anywhere near the final. He’s taken letting the game flow to the point of parody – he barely blows up for anything now and makes up rules on the hoof e.g. a tip tackle being ok because it wasn’t intentional.
Apparently some also like his constant humorous grandstanding and talking to grown men like they’re children. He looks like, to me, he’s bought into his own hype and is danger of turning himself into a bit of a joke with his pre-prepared “it’s not soccer” and front row lectures.
Absolutely spot on Brighty.
Owens can be a really good ref at times; but he can also take it too far. Games can become all about him sometimes. Communicaiton with players is vital to a good game, but if gets decisions wrong and spends more time talking that reffing; then it doesn’t create a good scenario.
Personally I would say Barnes seems to be have been one of the strongest refs so far. Seems to get the balance right between talking to players clearly and not talking for the sake of it.
Think your article is on balance correct. It is the inconsistent that any player, fan or supporter finds the most frustrating. I could even accept that Joubert had left the field without doing the post match hand shakes, but would at least have expected that he visit the Scotland and Australia changing rooms to shake hands and apologise for being caught short if he really needed a piss or sit down visit at the end of the game. From the reaction of the players I suspect he did not afford them that courtesy either.
In terms of the decision to award the penalty, I think he first signals for a scrum to Australia, but then changes his decision to a penalty after appeals from the Australian players, I’m slightly worried that the Ref’s are starting to come under undue influence from the constant chatter of the players. (both sides)
He signals penalty straight away.
Straight arm penalty, followed by knock on gesture followed immediately by the offside gesture. No delay of hesitation
Im not saying he got it right just that it is understandable how he got it wrong
Sorry but Joubert deserves everything he gets. Another in a long line of sh*tty south African refs – Watson, Kaplin and now Joubert.
Coming under undue influence from players Richard is surely far worse than simply getting a decision wrong. It shows weakness and inability to referee such a high pressure game. Joubert appeared undecided by initially indicating a scrum, then after whining from players he changed his mind. Surely the TMO or linos are the only people who can affect a decision.
This was an appalling decision that has cast a cloud over the final stages of the world cup and has skewed its authenticity. What if the Aussies go on and win it.
Not at all. Genuinely interested as to where the line between foul / non foul play is drawn
Sorry, this was meant to be a reply to Leon further up-thread
Hogg could have simply reaped what he has been sowing for the past few months. He has been guilty of dramatic throwing himself to the floor before, including at this tournament. Possibly the officials didn’t want to look at another case of him playing at being a footballer?
Joubert has form , gave the 2011 RWC to France , should have awarded Wales a penalty try v Australia last week always bias against Northern Hemisphere as are tmo’s
Want some fish with that chip on your shoulder? Don’t forget Joubert disallowed an Australian try earlier in the match due to a dubious ‘knock on’ that he referred to the TMO. Plus the scrum penalties to Scotland were extremely generous.
Suck it up princess.
Sorry “gave the 2011 RWC to New Zealand”
I’ve just seen the statement fro, World Rugby and wow – they have hung Joubert out to try. I was as emotional as most straight after the game but I fail to see what publicly stating Joubert was wrong will achieve. It won’t change who is in the QFs. It will ruin (too strong?) a big chunk of one man’s life.
Yes, he’s incompetent and needed to be trained and/or sidelined, but in a decent manner, not in public. World Rugby have just made a fiasco out of a farce.
Couldn’t agree more Brighty.
Joubert was wrong but even so, World Rugby should be backing a decision that was made in a split second and pointing out that he could not use the TMO
Any other words can be had in private not in the media. This just makes it much, much worse.
Also i have not had the stomach to watch again (yet) Wales v SA , i was at the game and felt then that Wayne Barnes wrongly gave scrum “put in” to SA from which their try was scored. Southern Hem again getting these crucial decisions at crucial times.
As a gutted Scotland fan I have still enjoyed every match I have watched,and for pure excitement the Scots v Aussie’s match was one of the best of the tournament.
It doesn’t really help that it has just been posted on the rugbyworldcup.com website that the referee selection committee have just confirmed that Joubert got the last penalty decision wrong.
However in Joubert’s defense he had to make s split-second decision and it would have been helpful to him if he would have been allowed within the laws to check the decision with the TMO.
Scotland did lead to their own downfall at the end of the match by not catching their own lineout.
There are some areas to address for world rugby:
1 The citing process has to reviewed.It has been inconsistent at best,not applied in an equitable way to all countries and some incidents e.g tip-tackles being cited for some games & missed in others.
I do believe player safety comes first and high tackles etc need to be penalised.
2 The referees need that extra help in a high pressure situation to have the right to check any decision at their discretion,especially match deciding ones.I realise we don’t want to have numerous stoppages in a match,but I’d rather the game was a little longer & get the right decision,especially if it decides the match.
Hopefully some good will come out of these incidents to improve citing and use of the TMO,removing dangerous tackles and helping the referees get the decision right,especially ones that decide the match.
More balanced & tolerant than I am brother, but I concur with all you’ve stated.
Joubert had a split second to decide & ANY ref would have likely made the same decision under the same circs. What else could have been the case? Hindsight & replays are as useless as an ashtray on a motorbike… AFTER the event.
If the TMO ‘controlled’ the game, the right decisions would surely more often be made as he could ‘correct’ the ref…& thus avoid the controversy events like that of last w/end.
The argument that TMO ‘interference’ would waste time just doesn’t stack up when compared with ave scrum time wastage; i.e. 10 / game! The real ? is; ‘do we want the correct result or not’?
A no brainer for me. It’s got to be right decisions… & refs need more support from WR to this end, esp in the aftermath of controversy.
‘player safety (does )come(s) first’, so ‘the citing process has to reviewed’! And ‘referees (DO) need that extra help in a high pressure situations’.
Well argued Ally.
‘…referee-bashing is unedifying…’ indeed & for Hastings to come out with all his stuff is character assassination.
However, when Barnes missed that fwd pass in 2007, any EnZeder stating this was labelled a whinger or a whiner or ‘.. it’s what happens on the day’ etc. Sound familiar? Well what’s the diff? Perhaps because of collective anger that the NH are out of the 1/4ers? Can’t have it both ways folks.
For me joubert has been a ref who lets the game flow so that we actually see some rugby. That he’s been pilloried by WC smacks of his being hung out 2 dry.
Poor form.
Fwd pass ? i think “EnZeders” got it back in shovel fulls after Joubert’s performance in 2011 RWC final ..let the game flow , he let NZ do as they wished. So , thats France 2011 who were lucky to overcome Wales (Warburton/Rowland) 2011 , Scotland 2015 not forgetting England 2007 (Cueto not in touch). “They” even tried in 2003 when dominant Eng scrum was continually penalised. I understand Barnes nvr refereed NZ since 2007 (sorry if that is incorrect).Wales have had no such luck the Frenchman Rowland did return to Wales officiating. He should have retired immediate following his diabolical decision to send off Warburton. No player has been sent off before or since for the same offence. Anyway common denominator bias against NH.
Don’t buy into Cheika’s comments about Gavin Hastings and Matt Dawson’s remarks. They have EVERY RIGHT to express their PROFESSIONAL opinions! Cheika’s message in my mind translates as:
“They’re professionals and should know better than to comment!”
Bollocks!
He doesn’t want them speaking up because they’re sending out the message (broadcasting it loud and clear even) that “Australia didn’t win and shouldn’t be in the semis.”
I suggest a rematch. If it’s a trite embarrassing for the RFU so be it.
If Australia still won I’d be okay with it just as long as it was fair and square.
It’s sport for christsake not investment banking! (Monied sport but sport nonetheless!)
DISGRACE
What do you Aussies out there think about it in the spirit of FairPlay?
Perhaps we’re the only ones who still believe in it! Quite possible. Sad but true!
i’m not sure about some of the comments on here that are akin to saying the ref is infallible/sacrosanct and untouchable.
Bollocks!
Everyone is accountable and if the decision(s) are as crass and bankrupt (albeit unwitting) as in the last five minutes of Scotland v Australia the response should not be “Oh well it’s the ref’s decision So let’s leave it at that!”
Nothing would ever get sorted or reformed in life if we applied that one to everything in life. Joubert is a man and IS accountable for THAT decision!
(No witch hunts but a rematch)