But here was a classic distillation of what rugby is in danger of becoming: a screen-obsessed, finger-pointing, hair-trigger argument that leaves the match officials helplessly caught in the middle. And it has to stop.
Well, it's becoming that because of TMO interference in every little thing. All is under scrutiny now and thrown on the big screen in super slowmo. The chalked off Lions try on Saturday is one example. The TMO and the ref seemed at odds about what the infringement actually was, if there was any. There was no reason to pull a try back for a 50/50 "maybe he was, maybe he wasn't" technical call.
And of course the public is jumping on board. Every hit remotely in the shoulder area gets a crowd reaction. "Yellow all day, red all day" go the fans. A brilliant try saving smother tackle with no malice and no danger gets the player a yellow card and rewards the poor tryline technique of the carrier by giving him the points.
World Rugby started this craziness when they handed the TMO rights to interfere at will and when they put everything under a microscope on the big screen and slowmo (which makes anything look worse, like Eben's half a second eye contact that looks like a continuous 5 second dig for diamonds in someone's eye socket on the slowmo).
If you watch old rugby before the replay and TMO and social media era, there were a lot of little mistakes missed - forward passes, knocks, etc. We shrugged it off.
Now, instead of making refereeing more accurate and less contentious, the drama and controversy has just escalated with inconsistencies and a flawed blanket standard that ignores player intention and often punishes good plays and unavoidable incidentals - none of which make the game safer.
And we're not coming back from this. The dark seed has been sown. You can write as many pleading articles as you want - if you feed the beast that is human nature, you will get the monster.
EDIT: missed this bit at the end due to the text wall, which says a lot of what I tried to say.
Add in a ridiculously overstuffed law book, a need to be seen to be prioritising player safety while simultaneously celebrating huge collisions and coaches seeking the slightest edge and it makes for an unedifying mix. Teams trying to milk cheap penalties under the notional banner of player welfare, players hamming up relatively innocuous incidents to encourage involvement from the television match official, repeated big-screen replays to inflame the crowd and try to influence the referee … none of it is enhancing either the spectacle or the game’s integrity.
9,880 posts
The Breakdown newsletterRugby union
Rugby needs to stop the screen-obsessed, finger-pointing, hair-trigger arguments
Game is in danger of losing its integrity by howling about referees’ decisions and unedifying actions on the field under the notional banner of player welfare
Robert Kitson
Tue 5 May 2026 10.10 BST
212
Prefer the Guardian on Google
It felt like a proper occasion in Bordeaux on Sunday. The trams were so jammed en route to the ground that the kick-off had to be delayed to allow spectators extra time to find their seats. For those who dismiss the notion of club rugby rivaling football for vibrant mass interest, here was a compelling counterpoint: a heaving 42,000-capacity stadium, off-the-scale passion, top-class sport in every respect.
Later on, after the game was done, there was another revealing snapshot at the airport. As Bath’s beaten players headed for their flight home they were warmly applauded down to the gate by their travelling supporters. A corner of a foreign departure lounge was briefly akin to north-east Somerset. Despite the outcome, the fans instinctively wanted to show how much they have enjoyed their team’s efforts this season.
Champions Cup final will have independent TV director in charge
Read more
In many ways it felt like a throwback to another era, when what mattered as much as anything else was the kinship, the shared blue, black and white bond and respect for the gladiators doing the hard yards. Until, that is, everyone returned to their smartphones and the very modern social media furore surrounding some of the big decisions in Bordeaux’s 38-26 Champions Cup semi-final victory.
From the sofa-bound majority at home there was much foam-flecked outrage. On the television it was alleged that Bath had been seriously wronged by the failure to penalise several upright tackles on their No 8, Alfie Barbeary. The talk was of routinely biased French TV directors, the sinister non-appearance of key replays and the monstrous unfairness of it all.
Even the normally implacable head coach, Johann van Graan, weighed in, insisting Barbeary had been the victim of three head shots in the 19th, 23rd and 42nd minutes. “All that we as coaches, players and lovers of the game ask is that there’s consistency,” he said. “I thought the referee, Nika Amashukeli, did a fantastic job and I thought Ben Whitehouse, the TMO, did the best he could with the angles available to him. However, for such an amazing contest, we need to make sure they’ve got the footage they need.”
Plenty there to encourage conspiracy theorists. Except that, on closer examination, things were less clear cut. The first incident, involving Maxime Lamothe was a low-impact soak tackle; not one player complained. The second, loudly proclaimed by Premier Sport’s Andy Goode to be clear foul play by Adam Coleman, was another red herring. In the ground, to the naked eye, it seemed a hard, but legal, shoulder to the upper body that rocked Barbeary’s head backwards, but did not connect with his face.
Even the third incident, the supposed open-and-shut case of Maxime Lucu and Barbeary clashing heads early in the second half, was not entirely what it seemed. Barbeary side-stepped into the contact, changing his angle late and ensuring the collision was closer to a glancing rugby incident than the full-frontal smash the much-shared still image implies. Amashukeli was close by and saw nothing seriously untoward.
Bath full-back Santi Carreras (right) is tackled by Salesi Rayasi during the Champions Cup semi-final. Photograph: Romain Perrocheau/AFP/Getty Images
On top of which it needs reiterating that Bordeaux were fully deserving winners. Yes, Sunday’s host broadcast director was French. Yes, it might have helped had a couple more TV angles been available. Yes, there have been historical instances in France of potentially vital replays going “missing”. Yes, brain health is paramount. But here was a classic distillation of what rugby is in danger of becoming: a screen-obsessed, finger-pointing, hair-trigger argument that leaves the match officials helplessly caught in the middle. And it has to stop.
No one is suggesting live punditry is an easy gig. But kneejerk pronouncements that “That’s at least a yellow” or “They’ve got to look at this” look less clever when they turn out to be wrong. Where is the considered verdict? Or the empathy with those making such big decisions in real time?
Add in a ridiculously overstuffed law book, a need to be seen to be prioritising player safety while simultaneously celebrating huge collisions and coaches seeking the slightest edge and it makes for an unedifying mix. Teams trying to milk cheap penalties under the notional banner of player welfare, players hamming up relatively innocuous incidents to encourage involvement from the television match official, repeated big-screen replays to inflame the crowd and try to influence the referee … none of it is enhancing either the spectacle or the game’s integrity.
skip past newsletter promotion
Sign up to The Breakdown
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
Those who argue that this is good news in terms of stimulating debate and online clicks are also ignoring the knock-on effects further down rugby’s pyramid: parents railing at referees and coaches on junior level touchlines, middle-aged fans who should know better increasingly howling at officials for costing their team victory.
People also have short memories. It is less than four weeks since Bath benefited late on in the quarter-final from a contentious breakdown penalty against Northampton’s Henry Pollock. To recycle Van Graan’s point, where is the consistency?
The best solution, in an ideal world, would be to mute the TMO’s microphone, cease showing out-of-context slow-mo replays other than to confirm or disallow tries, penalise only clear and obvious offences visible to the referee (aside from off-the-ball skullduggery spotted by his assistants) and put all other potential miscreants on report for potential retrospective action. None of which will dilute the importance of the head injury assessment process, with players continuing to be withdrawn permanently if either the independent doctor or the mouthguard technology decrees it.
French TV directors should also be invited to hop on the Eurostar and meet their British and Irish counterparts to discuss their shared craft over a flat white or three. And over-excited summarisers should be politely reminded that journalistic balance is an essential part of their remit. Then maybe the actual rugby can once more take centre stage.