The fallout that followed the Champions Cup semi-final between Bordeaux Bègles and Bath shone a light on the roles of the Television Match Official (TMO) and the local television director for the match broadcast. It also highlighted the importance of the footage that’s available or, indeed, unavailable.
It is often a source of frustration for supporters and viewers as to why certain footage or camera angles aren’t available at times. There is also a level of ignorance about what the TMO can and cannot do. I am indebted to Brian MacNeice who helped greatly in compiling the explainer.
Is rugby’s TMO process fair?
When does the TMO role begin?
The day before. They travel to the stadium and liaise with a production company and the television director. Pre-Covid, on match day the TMO was always in an outside broadcast (OB) van at the venue, in the same place physically as the TV director. During Covid the TMO was isolated in a room on his own and that has continued in some instances.
What’s the match set-up?
The TMO will be provided with a map of where all the cameras are positioned in the stadium for a game. The minimum number is eight cameras consisting of a wide and tight angle in the main stand, one each at the four corners (flags), a high one positioned behind the goal at one end and then a roving camera up and down the touchline.
READ MORE
Are all tournaments the same?
No. There are 24 to 32 cameras for a World Cup, Six Nations or equivalent tournament. The URC would have eight to 12, while there might be a couple more available for EPCR matches.
Are there any other differences to the TMO setups across tournaments?
Yes. Since the Foul Play Review system came in, for Test matches you will have a second TMO who reviews any foul-play issues. For EPCR, you don’t have that second person. In the URC there is an assistant TMO role – a new development this season. They review footage, rewind, examine various camera angles and when required, pick the best angle for the TMO to examine. It’s autonomous and independent and they don’t have to request footage from a TV director. They don’t have the assistant TMO in EPCR tournaments.
At the most recent World Cup, the company Hawk-Eye Innovations provided professional operators to assist the TMO, who are both technically superb and knowledgeable about rugby. If money was no object, it would be regarded as the ideal setup. All bunker referrals – they were remotely located in Roland Garros – in the World Cup were reviewed by what was essentially a two-TMO setup.
What’s the auditory connection between the TMO and match officials?
The TMO can hear all communication between the referee and his assistant referees (ARs). The former presses a button to activate a conversation with the referee. The ARs can hear the dialogue between the referee and TMO. The TMO does not have access to the match commentary.
What’s the basis of interaction between the TMO and the TV director?
If there is an incident for review, the TMO requests that the TV director provide all angles. Given that the TMO has a map of all the cameras available in the stadium, he or she can also request specific cameras, like ‘I want to see footage from cameras two, seven and 12′.
It’s the trickiest relationship because the TMO is wholly reliant on the pictures provided by the director. What can help is that a TMO has a delay screen, about five to six seconds behind the live action, to which he can quickly refer if something catches the eye in real time. He then requests the TV director to provide footage. The TMO might occasionally have to be persistent and unwavering to get the access required.
Given potential issues with the TV directors what’s the solution?
The URC model with the assistant TMO seems the most cost effective and best solution. It retains an autonomy over the process of allowing the assistant TMO to scan in the background and then bring to the TMO’s attention anything that requires further scrutiny. It will also guarantee a better flow and less stoppages. It gives control to those who should have the control.
What’s the change in how the TMO can intervene following the 2023 World Cup in France?
A TMO used to be able to review two phases prior to a try being scored. This related to a long list of infractions outside of a foul-play issue. For the latter, they were able to go back further. Post the last World Cup, a TMO may now review the last “unbroken attacking phase of play”, whether it’s one or 15 phases.
Let’s say there’s a scrum. A team goes through multiple phases and eventually scores. The TMO can review all the phases from the scrum to the try. If there’s a turnover in possession and then the defending team kicks the ball away, giving it back to the attacking team, it’s only from the point at which the attacking team takes over again that it’s determined to be the last unbroken attacking phase.
Can a TMO disagree with a referee’s adjudication?
No. It’s not up to the TMO to re-referee an incident. The only time a TMO would challenge a referee is if the official has said something factually incorrect.
For example, a referee adjudges head contact with a high degree of danger after reviewing footage. The TMO’s input is to either agree or to disagree with the facts. If the TMO could prove shoulder rather than head contact through a camera angle, it’s factual. If a referee decides an incident came with a high degree of danger, a TMO would not challenge that assertion because it’s down to opinion. Once the facts are correct, the TMO has no further role.
