Why can't the TMO just make a decision? 

No brainer. Should have been awarded. The issue is that the ref made the call which means his split second decision becomes more important than 4 minutes of slow motion replays.

Utter disgrace of a decision. As a Scotland fan I have partially fallen out of love with the sport after this. Genuinely dreadful game management.

The on field decision was that the ball was held up, meaning by implication the ball has to be over the line so the TMO should not have needed the clarification of the ball being on or over the line. All he needed to see was grounding which was 100% there. The no try call made absolutely no sense.

Thing is the TMO clearly said the ball had been grounded. And then seemed to pull back from that - maybe Shaun Edwards gave him a nasty look or something.

These 3 clowns have a different answer every week based on Scotland - I have to sit here and watch this absolute biased BS - even Irish journos in the UK are seeing this for what it is

What BS , any sain person knows that hit the ground

That decision has destroyed a potential Grand Slam showdown in Dublin on the final day. I’m Irish but that decision was weak and a disgrace !!!!

It should be proof of holdup.. Not proof of grounding.

Just watched a few of their videos on Scotland. And the hate is so weird. They seemed genuinely inferior to us even though they have a far better team than us. Constantly talk up other teams whilst playing us, and continually berate us. Weird behaviour. Pick on a team that is of the same quality, problem is, when you do that. You get knocked out in the QFs🤦‍♂️💔

'He couldn't make a decision if the ball was over the line'?!.....nonsense, he immediately called 'held up' which is only valid if the ball is on the line or in the try area.

Absolute brilliant point. When is there 100% certainty in many aspects of Rugby?

Sometimes you get robbed in your own home. What a shame for Scotland.

The game needs a good shake up. Over four minutes to decide whether it was a try or not only to give the wrong decision. Scrums taking up to to much time and the ping pong kickings from backs to backs, all making it a poorer game to watch.

The referee and TMO are bang on, 100% correct. You can see the ball on a French player's boot, then there's a gap where you see nothing, then there's the ball on the ground. That's not a grounding. To overturn his on-field decision of "ball held up", he needs CONCLUSIVE evidence of a SCOTTISH HAND applying downward pressure to the ball in the in-goal area. Show me that conclusive evidence. Hint: It isn't there. Pro tip: the ball appearing to lay on the ground after disappearing for a few seconds isn't evidence of the above. It may well have been grounded, but we'll never know, because there's no conclusive evidence. Ergo, Nic Berry was correct not to overturn his on-field decision. As an alternate reality, had Nic Berry said on-field decision was a try, in order to overturn that he would have needed CONCLUSIVE evidence of some part of a French player's body holding the ball up. There wasn't any of that either. So the decision would have remained try. That's why the on-field decision is so important in 50/50 scenarios, and he couldn't just assume it was grounded. The only people who know if that ball was legitimately grounded or not were the handful of players there at the time.

What everybody is missing is that "conclusive" does not mean 100% certainty. Within the context of the rule under consideration, "conclusive" means a rational conclusion beyond reasonable doubt based on the footage. The footage clearly shows the ball being place on a booted foot, then moving off the booted foot onto the ground. It is not rationally possible for the ball to have dropped as much as the footage shows if a hand or other human part had been between the ball and the ground. The only rational conclusion beyond reasonable doubt based on the footage, is that the ball was grounded unless you believe little creatures from outer space suddenly appeared and put their little hands or other body parts under the ball. What everybody is also missing, is that there was a mix-up between the Ref and the TMO. The TMO was waiting for the Ref to say: "I now see the ball moving off the booted foot and onto the ground; therefore my on-field decision must be reversed. The TMO would then have said: 'I agree'. Instead the Ref said words to the affect: "You are telling me that ...." this threw the responsibility back onto the TMO (and, under the rules, the Ref was kind of right to throw the responsibility back onto the TMO). The TMO being faced with the awesome responsibility, not having the Ref holding his hand, and not properly understanding "conclusive" as used in the rule, 'shat' himself given the massive responsibility that had been thrown back on him, and made an irrational, wrong decision which may haunt him for the rest of his life! Had the rules of the game been correctly applied, Scotland would have won that game of rugby.

At the end of the day, people want the correct decision to be based on what you can see on video evidence. To them, it doesn't matter who makes the decision as long as the correct decision is made. In this case in my opinion it should have been awarded. I also feel the law on being held up should be reconsidered. The defenders now pull the attacker over the line, on top of them to prevent the try as they get rewarded for "good defence", but this can lead to serious injury(player safety should be first) and if any other players are attached it should be collapsing the mall. If an attacker is tackled, the tackler should release him first which usually gives the attacker chance to place the ball. With this scenario this never happens so the rules around this has too many grey areas in it.

Matt Williams....uuggghh...lets just take the ref out of it and use AI

The biggest issue here is that the refs are too lazy now, because the have the “luxury” of the TMO, to go digging in the ruck and look for a grounding, like they used to do. If he’d taken a couple seconds to actually go looking he could’ve seen the grounding with his own eyes.

The point is the ref called the ball grounded watching replay but still didn't call it.. then tmo says ball grounded after it was on foot then dithered and said he couldn't call it.. never once called whether on or over line. Farce..

If the ref cannot make the decision then the TMO makes the decision. Simple.

Irish TMO involved in a game that effects Ireland that isn’t right

In previous years they had 2 questions.. Try..yes or no Any reason I cannot award the try

How does law 13 apply? Is a player on the ground but not in possession of the ball still in play?

Tmo must make decision and not the ref Scotland win

Hahahaha now we need the TMO?! 😂😂😂

the process is right but the TMO is blind, the ball was clearly grounded. everyone including the French can see that, only the TMO cannot. TMO needs disciplinary and suspension and retraining.

As if the Scottish don't do enough crying already, this will keep the chip well stuck tk the shoulder fir many years to come.

Also Scotland scored a try which shud not have been allowed.. high tackle by Van de Merve no TMO call.

I personally want the bunker system removed it is only going to cause more controversial moments. Plus the ref should make his/her own choice. The amount of time it took for the person in charge to give the tmo the footage is to slow happened twice in the English v welish game and also the welish v Scottish one to

in cricket umpire makes decision which can be overturned by TMO this works

It's a try and wrong decision scotland deserved the win and a pitty this is the talking point of a awesome game.

The hypocrisy of this is so funny 😅

This was entirely about the language used by the referee, nothing else. The real kicker is results that hinge on decisions like this hugely affect ranking positions, and ultimately the draw for the next RWC pools. If your aunty had balls!

Quand les images ne montrent rien ce serait plus juste de donner l'essai à l'équipe qui franchit la ligne... When the images don't show anything, you should give the try to the team that crosses the line... that would be less unfair.

We love the TMO and the laws during SA vs All blacks but we don’t like when it’s used in the six nations. Waaaghh!

If referee say held up, TMO needs to show that it’s a try. Nothing controversial here as no camera angle shows a grounded ball.. if anything looks like foot blocking the ball, nothing controversial here. In fact it would controversial to award a try if the defence had prevented a grounding. These are the rules of rugby!

Everyone watching knows it was a try. Rugby has become a laughing stock when a TMO says yes Nick, ball is grounded, let me have another look ... well can't see every blade of grass and my lunch is ready and my best mate Pierre says the ball clearly videoed on the ground over the try line might not be a try, given the shadow of Mars cast through the moon ... no ... no evidence that the ball on the ground under a Scottish chest is on the ground ... eh ... let me look at this ball on the ground again ... could be on top of and ant, or maybe a leaf ... can't quite disprove that ... must be worms under the soil of Murrayfield so I am going to say the ball you can see grounded is not evidence of a grounded ball and therefore no try. I would recommend the TMO and ref look to becoming Tory MPs as they are just as honest and just as intelligent.

It was probably a try, but since neither the ref, nor the TMO had a clear view of a grounding, no try. It needs to be conclusive. If the shoe were on the other foot, one wonders if people might have a very different opinion.

Was a try

To answer the title: cause TMO's doesn't have the b4lls to do that. Italy was robbed when the TMO didn't wanted to see the Mitchell double movement. Scotland was robbed today.

Accept the ref is the guvnor.

What a clown show.

Don’t know what point the pundits are trying to make. Anyone with two eyes and brain can see that ball is grounded. The angle where Berry is looking at the ruck, you can clearly see the ball is grounded before he blows. Terrible officiating. Terrible TMO. Pundits have the voice, that are able to call out decisions like this, so maybe we can move forward with our game. But instead they protect referees saying “it’s a hard job and you’ve got to feel for them”. In any over job in the world, that sort of gross incompetence you get the sack.

1) grounding is assumed, the interaction ball ground is not visible, itis assumed. 2) we must see the player pressing the ball down to validate the try. None of the first 2 points could be seen by TMO: back to on-field call. Biggest issue for me is the major offside fromrussel to steal the ball from the french which was ignored…