Henry: TMO made right call

2011-08-21 14:05

Port Elizabeth - New Zealand coach Graham Henry said the right decision had been made when a try by his team was disallowed after a television review during Saturday's 18-5 Tri Nations defeat against South Africa - even though it was technically outside the rules.

WIN your very own personalised Bok jersey

With the All Blacks trailing 5-15 seven minutes into the second half, full-back Israel Dagg made a 60-metre dash which was stopped just short of the line when he was tackled by replacement wing Francois Hougaard.

Dagg managed to offload to scrum-half Jimmy Cowan, who dived over but replays showed the pass was forward.

Irish referee George Clancy asked South African television match official Johann Meuwesen to rule whether a try had been scored. Meuwesen responded that the ball had been grounded correctly.

Then he asked: "Would you like more information?" When Clancy replied positively, Meuwesen said: "There was a forward pass."

Henry said: "It was a reality, it wasn't awarded. If we were on the receiving end and South Africa scored a try that was disallowed because of a forward pass we would be happy about that.

"If the officials can make good decisions on the evidence they've got, why not?

"I know it's outside the rules of the game - they should only adjudicate over the goal line - but I don't have a problem with it."


  • Grunk - 2011-08-21 14:14

    Thank you Mr Henry. When it is recognised that "the law is an ass" in certain circumstances and that commonsense, justice and fair play should prevail over the written word then this world generally (and particularly the sport I love) will be a far, far better place. The only pity is that your 1st try was also due to a forward pass.

      p123 - 2011-08-22 07:46

      Their were heaps of forward passes by the All Black backs!!

  • OZNOB - 2011-08-21 14:33

    he is a gentleman of note

  • Steyts - 2011-08-21 14:39

    Well done Mr. Henry! I just can't think that if the roles were reversed, most people in South Africa and especially P Divvy would have been cursing!! I'm probably one of them! Anyway, the team that won was definitely the better team on the field!

      kosie - 2011-08-22 12:46

      and on the scoreboard

  • POLAR_BEAR - 2011-08-21 14:52

    Graham Henry is a true sportsman. Certain other coaches would have complained bitterly. Speaking of the rules, was Jacque Fourie not standing way offside in defence on a few occasions? Just a question.

      Bulldozer - 2011-08-21 22:23

      He is always offside, regardless of who he plays for.

      geewiz - 2011-08-22 15:01

      @Bulldozer: ooooh nee, that's a good one!

  • Deon - 2011-08-21 14:58

    Gooe comment, and sportmanship - I just thought the first pass on the 1/2 way line wasalready a forward pass.

  • Riaan - 2011-08-21 15:20

    Well done sir!

  • Jakes71 - 2011-08-21 15:20

    I don't want to sound like a Bulls supporter, but Clancy nailed the All Blacks. Suppose it's revenge for the whipping Scotland got when they last played NZ. Hope the referees are better during the RWC.

      Mason - 2011-08-21 15:29

      I definately hope the Aussie and Kiwi's are better!! Bryce Lawrence is atrocious as well as that other Ozzie idiot!

      Nikki - 2011-08-21 17:04

      He didn't nail them enough Jakes...the other try was ALSO off a forward pass and the AB's are still at their old tactic of obstructing around the ruck area...Luckily we'll see who's boss now that Brussow is back..and on fire! McCaw must be sleeping a little less easy these days...

      FJ2 - 2011-08-21 20:36

      @Jakes71: You must be joking. They should've been penalised a lot more for infringements in the rucks. But Clancy was useless - these Northern Hemisphere refs can't keep up with the pace of the game in our hlf of the globe, even when the sometimes pedestrian Boks are playing.

      pj - 2011-08-21 21:37

      Clancy is Irish

      Mickey Fin - 2011-08-21 22:38

      Well done Jakes71 for your comment which is spot on! I counted at least 5 times that Brussow was off his feet playing the ball. Also a few instances where he was the tackler and did not realease the player before going for the ball. That is where a good captain makes the differance by pointing this out to the ref, something the All Blacks failed to do.I am not getting excited about this winbecause of the ref and also the fact that our line was breached 23 times!!!!!

      Wormtongue - 2011-08-21 22:51

      Mickey Fin are you suggesting Ritchie McCaw should point out to the ref that someone else is breaking the rules "on the ground"? LOL. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

      GraemeBB - 2011-08-22 00:20

      @Jakes - dont want to sound like a Bull's supporter, then you cry like a Stormer? Gee, you NZ supporters are always breaking the rules - and I am happy to see you boys pay the price.

  • Allin - 2011-08-21 15:23

    Graham Henry, you are a gentleman.

  • Mpuma Fred - 2011-08-21 15:38

    my question is who is the ass journalist that is making an issue of it

      Green Tea - 2011-08-22 07:53

      I know, what a 'tard! Anyway, it was not outside the rules. Clancy failed to ask either of the prescribed questions, "try, no try? or "can you give me any reason not to award the try?" The first question pertains to the grounding only, the second question gives the TMO permission to look at the play leading up to the try to ascertain if their were any indiscretions that may discount the try scored, i.e. a forward pass, knock on, etc. Clancy asked "is it a try?" To which the TMO correctly and wisely said the grounding was good, but do you require any further information? Don't know how anyone could be too upset at the TMO, Clancy was the idiot that forgot to phrase the question correctly!

  • adrien.mcguire - 2011-08-21 16:43

    Good on you Graham Henry. That is sportsmanship at it's best. I disagree with his comment about only adjudicating over the goal line, as often tries are disallowed when there has been a foot in touch before the line. This is no different. The call from the ref was "try or no try" . It clearly was not a try due to the forward pass so the right thing was done. So well done Graham Henry for your sportsmanship, well done to the ref for checking and well done to the TMO for doing your job. Thanks all of you.

      wood - 2011-08-21 18:07

      Adrien.Henry was not giving an opinion on the question of adjudicating over the goal line.He was stating a fact.The TMO is only allowed to comment when the ball is over the goalline irrespective if there were 20 knockons or forward passes to that point.This is why probably the patriotic enthusiastic TMO has had his last international.

      adrien.mcguire - 2011-08-21 22:59

      Wood. I think the rules are then misleading because there have been many precedents where tries have been disallowed due to a foot in touch before the ball has been touched down eg the England try in the 2007 WC final. But I bow to your obvious knowledge of the rules and technicalities of the game. Nuff said

      Green Tea - 2011-08-22 07:57

      @Wood, you need to either actually watch rugby or read the rules on the IRB website. The referee is allowed to ask one of two prescribed questions, "try, no try? or "can you give me any reason not to award the try?" The first question pertains to the grounding only, the second question gives the TMO permission to look at the play leading up to the try to ascertain if their were any indiscretions that may discount the try scored, i.e. a forward pass, knock on, etc. Clancy asked "is it a try?" To which the TMO correctly and wisely said the grounding was good, but do you require any further information? Don't know how anyone could be too upset at the TMO, Clancy was the idiot that forgot to phrase the question correctly!

  • Frans Smith - 2011-08-21 16:50

    good man - even though a forward pass cost them the 2007 potential world cup..luckily for sa

  • Johann - 2011-08-21 17:14

    Their allowed try was also from a forward pass.

  • Jan - 2011-08-21 17:16

    In that same move leading up to the "try", there was another forward pass

  • Tiger - 2011-08-21 19:18

    "Old never smile" het my nou verbaas. Sou dit ook sy response gewees het as dit die World Cup Final (wat die AB in elk geval op tv gaan volg) was? Vra maar net...

  • Jeffrey Jones - 2011-08-21 19:20

    G. Henry is sporting to make the comment. As for the allowed try and the forward pass. They happen every week in provincial and international rugby; The ref is often not at a good angle to make the correct call. Same can be said for the "assistant referees". Direct sight is often obscured by other players, especially on short passes.

  • Owentjie - 2011-08-21 19:47

    If this happened in reverse against the boks, it would have been a good pass, and the tmo would have ruled against us.On defense, at the world cup one team against the all black is going to come to terms with the fact that you have to take all the guys out of their offensive line as they run their screen, that way the AB s will lose their offload options, and will be lost to why they cant score tries and lose. I hope this team will be SA this year, Im tired of France getting the honors and then choking. Go boks win the perfect world cup.

  • di - 2011-08-21 20:49

    To all the people who think that Bok supporters only gripe about lousy refereeing when we lose, I would say that Mr Clancy had a shocker of a game!

  • lennox.daly - 2011-08-21 20:57

    Fully agree, but if the TMO was outside of the rules when making his call, then there is a problem as to how far the decision can be referred. Example, if there was a forward pass on the opposite goal line, and with technology, there could be a problem. To makes things worse where was the assistant referee when the forward pass happened 9TV shows he was right there. Unfortunately he was not up to standard and the unfortunate TMO could have been excused his comments.

      Gambit9 - 2011-08-21 22:18

      Well the TMO did ask if he could give additional information, to which the Ref agreed, he could have refused and only ask for a ruling to the question he posed.I thought Mr. Clancey did ok - the problem is human as refs are if they make mistakes, we write them off & refs don't carry grudes into a game they would not last 5 minutes on the park if that was the case.This does beg the question how much more is technology going to come into play in-front of the goal line & how far does that extend to, as far as the "22". Also TV revues are used for penalizing dirty play

  • kekkel - 2011-08-21 21:44

    is it not strange that they were only blewn up on the forward passess in the 2nd half? majority of their passess were forward, throughout the game but it went by unnoticed. and that number 7, oh my, innosence on his face every time he was blown up!

  • Rob Jones - 2011-08-21 22:15

    As i said yesterday the TMO who was a Local school teacher was wrong, and the try should have been awarded rightly or wrongly. These are the same rules that all teams will be playing under in the world cup. Imagine if that was the winning try in the final,and it was awarded. Technically it should have been awarded.Latest press release from Paddy Obrien Irish referee George Clancy will control the opening match in the World Cup but faces a warning about his no-try blunder which cost the All Blacks yesterday in Port Elizabeth. Clancy asked for a "try or no try" verdict in Jimmy Cowan's touchdown but broadened that inquiry when television match official Johan Meuswesen asked if he needed more information about a forward pass. Eventually the pair rubbed the try out but International Rugby Board referees' boss Paddy O'Brien said the ruling was incorrect. "The referee and the television match official were operating outside our agreed protocol," O'Brien said yesterday. "That will be addressed with George [Clancy] in our review of the game. It was disappointing and will form part of our discussions when we next meet."

      Karoobloed - 2011-08-21 22:39

      O'Brien is right by the Rule Book, and thus so you were too. Henry is morally right, and rises even further in my estimation. From your previous postings it is evident you are biased against your own national rugby team. You probably would not have uttered a peep if a Bok try was disallowed under similar circumstances. You are clearly not in the class of Graham Henry.

      Howzitekse - 2011-08-22 09:23

      Karoobloed, I agree with you, but very few people are in the same class as Graham Henry, especially the TV ref, with the linesman also a rubbish (who was he?) The match ref should maybe have overruled the TV ref, as he has to abide by the rules, even if they are wrong.

  • kurtvs - 2011-08-21 22:58

    Congratulations to the Boks on a well deserved victory! Although the referee were pathetic and favouring the Boks at the breakdown, I would not go as far as to put this up as an excuse. The All Blacks should learn to adapt when this situation occurs when things are not going their way ala quarterfinal 2007. I am however sure that with the right selections they will lift both tri-nations and world cup titles 2011.

  • Alan - 2011-08-21 23:07

    Ofourse it was the right decision, just split seconds before that the whole move was started with a forward pass and finally ended with a meter fwd pass. The touch judge was right there, what was he looking at??? Even the first and only try was started with a kiwi fwd pass - if the refs continue to allow the kiwis to play of fwd pass ball they will break defenses at will, simple fact of the game. In all I counted 8 clear fwd passes by the kiwis which were not picked up and gave them great fwd momentum. Luckily the disallowed try was picked up. Even SBW looked shocked when his ofload near the end was called fwd. He must have been thinking "hey ref you let all the others go, why not this one?" As for poor old Adam Thompson, he did nothing more than Richie McGaw does all game long but at least this time the ref penalised him and that was the difference between the 2 teams - for once the kiwis were punished for ofside and foul play at the break down, mind you not all the imte and they still got away with a hell of a lot. If calls were made properly they would have struggled for ball and probably only had 40% or less possession with a much bigger loosing margini. That all said I am glad the bokke won as it was the correct result and a good life going into the RWC.

      Rob Jones - 2011-08-21 23:23

      Alan You are an absolute tosspot. The Boks never really looked like scoring didnt matter how much ball you gave them.Their backline had less creativity than a 3 year old in a sand pit.You were obviously watching a different game in a semicomitized state of mind. Karoobloed you make a very bold and factually incorrect statement my national team is the All Blacks, and I certainly do support them

      Alan - 2011-08-21 23:29

      @ Rob Jones, weldone on the name calling, your mother raised you well. Where on earth in my comment did I say the boks showed creativity? What I did say is that the ABs are constantly rewarded for inaccurate play i.e. fwd passes, obstructions in the ruck area and illegally playing the ball on the ground. My friend that is a fact, you and I can watch any game of theirs in the last 10 years and I will show you over and over again until you cry at the realisation your team only looks good cause they are allowed to cheat. ABs are only about 4th or 5th in the world if the playing fields are level.

      adrien.mcguire - 2011-08-21 23:32

      @Rob jones. Firstly look at the final score before you make any more comments that make you look like a retard, and secondly if you can't even make sense of Karoobloed's post you have proved that you actually are a retard. Slagging bloggers is not a good way to promote dialogue, just try and keep your comments a little intelligent.

      Karoobloed - 2011-08-22 05:08

      Fancy footwork on the nationality issue there "Rob Jones" (Maori?). Any mention of NZ nationality on your Birth certificate or Passport?

      wood - 2011-08-22 09:44

      Alan try using the other eye as well.Either the Bok centres have been training with Usain Bolt or they were standing permanently offside .Fourie is a carthorse yet he was standing in SBW face before he got the ball. Not one whistle I can recall. With Clancy and your `neutral`TMO you guys shouild never ever complain again how all referees are against you

  • Rob Jones - 2011-08-21 23:37

    Alan You are obvioulsy struggling with recollection of what you said I will post it for you. If calls were made properly they would have struggled for ball and probably only had 40% or less possession with a much bigger loosing margin. Alan you have to score points trys to get a much bigger winning margin did that thought ever cross your mind when you posted the comment. The Boks backs were pathetic ,and never looked like scoring.So I dont know how you can make such a comment.I stuggle with your lack of logic ,and or knowledge of the game

      Alan - 2011-08-22 00:14

      Rob, so by showing no imagination they scored 18 points, with more ball more points, whether by the same means i.e. the boot or by finally bashing through the defenders - that's logic. I don't understand your thinking on this point as I am not saying the Boks showed imagination. That is something you wanted to state, great you said it, its true of yesterdays game but so is the fact the AB were allowed too many fwd pass line breaks and obstruction line breaks. Turn those over (and they were in the AB half) and there was a very strong possibilty SA would have scored more points, hence the bigger winning margin. I haven't said SA are the greatest side, they showed real class, no they showed desperation, resilience and a better defense (still not great). They did show a marked fitness improvement and physicality but the real threats this RWC are Australia but I do believe SA with fair calls are also in with a shout. Everyone has AB as favourite but I believe with fair calls that tag is unwarrented and they will come unstuck again.

      buckaroo - 2011-08-22 13:48

      Come over to SA... we'll explain it to you.

  • Rob Jones - 2011-08-21 23:43

    Adriene Well done on the 5 penalties and a drop goal. We need it a wake up call and it was great for our world cup build up. No one in NZ really believed the All Blacks should win this game with 11 changes form the team that belted the Wallabies if you did then you have a total lack of faith. Just two chnages alone would have made a huge difference Mccaw and Carter. There were holes in the South African back line bigger than the grand canyon Carter would have exploited them all day as well as getting his kicks.

  • Zion - 2011-08-22 06:22

    Fromwhat I can gather from the above information the law was practically raped in order to arrive at a preconcieved outcome. TheOTM definitely acted outside the scope of his job by providing additional but unasked for information. We know why!!

  • Bok Fan - 2011-08-22 07:35

    All Black whingers get stuffed. It wasnt outside the rules of the game. The refs request for informatiuon ws being clarified. If the forward pass, offside, breakdown and scrum rules had been properly applied you would have had fifty something hiding and Richie Mcaw would be the most yellow carded played in history.

      Howzitekse - 2011-08-22 09:06

      It was a forward pass, but the question was outside the rules as they stand, and the TV ref should be disciplined. He has no right to ask that question. It is a serious black mark against SA officials, and I can already hear the Ausie comentators using this to question the integrity of our other refferees.

      wood - 2011-08-22 16:59

      Bok fan. It was outside the rules of the IRB who for better or worse run this game The problem is not the try .It definitely should not have been a try a couple of times over but thats not the point. The TMO has been restricted basically to things happening over the goalline Imagine if the Boks after 15 phases scored a try and some hometown TMO in Sydney or Auckland called them back for something insignificant 3 minutes earler and 80 metres down the pitch. It would be chaos and rightly so which is why you cannot have a TMO making such calls.

  • Gary - 2011-08-22 08:01


  • Gibbonater - 2011-08-22 08:24

    Common sense prevailed unlike in soccer. Not to much of it gets used these days.

  • Lehan - 2011-08-22 10:55

    Mr George Clancy gave me a glimmer of hope for the referees at the World Cup. I have been worried that there have meen very few top class referees involved in important matches as of late, but Mr Clancy had an excellent game in my opinion. Just take the example where he landed up being taken off his feet with Ashley Johnson falling on top of him. Many a cowardice referee would have stopped the game right there and probably made sure their toupe was still in tact. However George Clancy just kept an eye on the game from underneath Johnson and got back to his feet as soon as he could and never unneccesarily stopped the game at all. I look forward to seeing this ref around more often, good job. And isn't it nice being able to complement a ref for a change?

  • clivegoss - 2011-08-22 12:25

    Mr Henry that is why All Black Springbok rugby is what it is. We will all play our guts out but in the end it is a game for gentlemen and true sportsmanship rules. You are a gentlemen and a scholar

  • Hangmann - 2011-08-22 13:27

    Graham Henry, you're a credit to the sport of rugby (the AB's passed very flat and forward on the whole, at least the ref picked up one of them).

  • - 2011-08-22 13:59

    Mr Henry, as we say in CPT, "is kooping gevriet". Comments like this is buying favour with referees. Had this been the semi's of the RWC, he'd be singing a very different tune.

  • Zion - 2011-08-22 14:43

    Foresight is better than hind sight. Here Henry made a fool out of himself. The IRB who are the gods in rugby stated otherwise. Like it or not. The OTM stepped outside his mandate. End of story.

  • douwgerbrand.nortier - 2011-08-23 08:24

    Thumbs up for Graham Henry, thumbs down for ass holes like paddy o'brien.

  • pages:
  • 1