Well said John Smit

The two ref system wasn't implemented very well. They need defined roles and strategic positioning on the field. It can be done. 

Whether it's on-field or TMO, the laws of the game still require a level of subjectivity and no ref or TMO is going to please everyone.

The refs and TMOs are the best and most qualified people on our planet to do the job. If you have some bright idea how to improve the TMO decisions then I'm all ears but if you're just going to bang on like Baboon-ou about how they're all useless and need to improve then you probably fall into the category of people who should find another sport to watch . . . something simpler like cricket where the decisions are measurable and clear cut or football where as a ref you're only really looking for fouls and handballs, nothing else.

Rugby is much more complex therefore there will be far more questionable or controversial decisions. 

Rugby is by far the most difficult major sport to officiate. Either get used to refs and TMOs making mistakes

No. That is incorrect. Other sports are way more difficult to officiate as what may be called a mistake usually is clear cut.

In rugby, people confuse their own perception as being the right one whereas other perceptions may be as well right.

The rugby game operates under a different paradigm. When in other sports, the outcome of an action supercedes everything else, in rugby, the outcome does not matter as much as the way to justify the perception of the outcome.

When a ref in rugby assesses the situation of a try, it does not matter to know whether the try is, what matters is the way to validate or invalidate a try. The way must comform to the rules, laws of rugby.

In many situations, in a case of a try or fouls or whatever, a ref can answer yes, there is a try/foul, no, there is no try/foul.

In every case, the ref must focus of the legality of the call. That is all.

And that is what people calling out refs for so called mistakes have wrong. They fail to consider the situation from the legal point. The call of a ref is in many situations wrong only when the justification provided does not match the laws of the game.

Reffing in rugby is very different by substance as it allows a ref to answer yes or no to a situation as long as the answer is conform to the law.

That is probably how this sport was chosen by the Apartheid regime.

Rugby is much more complex therefore there will be far more questionable or controversial decisions.

No. Incorrect. Complexity has nothing to do with the ability to answer yes or no, 0 or 1.Complex problems usually have determined solutions.

Rugby is one of the least complex sports to ref as the answer does not matter.

All it takes is to learn how to validate or invalidate the perception of an outcome using the texts of rugby.

Erasmus is using social media to create that external pressure to bend the refs into making those 50/50 calls for his team.

Alucard making his name mud again. NO Rassie is calling out bad reffing and somebody has to do it. If you think all these calls are fifty fifty you are dafter than a hatter! 

The IRB do nothing and the game is being spoilt by these guys. Refs don't get disciplined like players do. They are a protected species and so here we are

As for Lardy John he is a stand out when it comes to a go along to get along type.  Useless oak.

Stop squealing girls Rassie is doing the right thing standing up for the Boks when they are getting robbed. Man  some oaks here  have no moral fibre. Utterley pathetic.

Fifty fifty calls should even out but the problem is there is bias at times! Reffing one side only its called.

Then we get to blatant mistakes which we are asked to believe the ref, touchline judges and TMO all cant sort out. Then we are asked to accept that repeated blatant mistakes must also be accepted. Bwahahhahahahahahaha only the most pathetic of loons would accept this nonsense i.e. you have to be as weak kneed as poor rooitwit and as dumb! As for mozzz as long as time is not wasted who cares how much rubbish reffing is dished out.

No thinking people realize this has to be sorted out and things can be vastly improved via is there was a will to do it.

Rassie has made a great contribution at considerable personal risk to get this debate going. I fear though that many more videos are necessary before the establishment are forced to clean up the game.

Balls! The whole thing is too complex for you, you just want a villain so you can play the victim.

For ever is right…reducing the game to a video review borathon.

So, the coach of the least penalised team of all top 20 nations (by a comfortable margin) is a hero for standing up to the boogeyman who is victimising the team, thereby costing them tests matches? I wonder how the coaches and players of the teams who have been shafted by refs against the Boks are feeling? This could have enormous long term repercussions. 

I'd love to walk Erasmus through the past two seasons alone. It would be very educational. However, I doubt the man is honest and open enough to provide a two-way review of the matter. Of course, it is all slanted to control the referee the way he controls South African rugby.