TALKING POINT

Not so long ago we all accepted that the referee was in sole charge of fact at rugby matches, his authority unchallengeable.

That has been eroded in recent years, however and not only by players who increasingly overdo the communication both in terms of the nature and quantity of what they have to say.

As alluded to earlier in this competition television is having an increasing say in all sorts of aspects of proceedings to the extent that some are worried that it has sold its soul to the broadcasters.

One of my oldest pals in this business Billy Lothian, who was rugby correspondent of the Edinburgh Evening News for much longer than either of us care to remember, has missed no opportunity to rant about their intrusiveness and as welcome as their money clearly is for sport there are times when it feels a bit too much.

We have all been at matches where we are wondering why the game has not started only to look at the referee to see him peering towards the sidelines, waiting for the thumbs up from an assistant producer to tell him that the adverts are over and we can get on with things.

There was, too, the incident at the start of this tournament when Niko Matawalu, the former Glasgow Warrior, was awarded a try and then denied not, it seemed, because the referee opted to got to the Television Match Official who monitors the replays, but because a TV producer had, in a match involving the hosts, chosen to run a replay which was shown on the big screens in the ground, from an angle that made it clear that the ball had been dropped just before being grounded.

With the conversion attempt already being lined up the referee appeared to see that replay and then ask for the play to be reviewed at which point what could have be a momentum changing score was ruled out.

The way in which host broadcasters could potentially influence the outcome of matches by showing or temporarily withholding footage was immediately obvious, but the question of the extent to which the cameras should be allowed to intrude has also been raised.

Philippe Saint-Andre, France’s head coach, made light of it, but admitted after his half-time rant at his players during his half-time team talk last week that he had not been aware that the presence of cameras, albeit with the sound turned off, was mandatory in dressing rooms, joking that he would, in future, hold consider holding such discussions in the shower rooms which, we would like to think, will always remain camera free.

Television will always tell us that their innovations are merely designed to enhance the viewer experience by letting us see as much of what is happening behind the scenes as possible, but there comes a point where it moves from being informative to voyeuristic and I cannot help but feel that stage has been reached.

Setting aside any question of whether there is something a bit distasteful about this desperation to see into changing rooms, was there not something a bit more magical about sport in the days when our first sighting of the participants was them ready to play and we were left to wonder and ask questions about what may or may not have been said in dressing rooms before or during matches?

There probably was, but in this digital, social media oriented world in which everything anyone thinks is instantly posted to the widest possible audience, fully illustrated, it is probably too much to hope for.

In saying so it is worth repeating that it all goes too far when there is any suggestion that television producers can have a say in on-field decisions.

To that extent, however much the broadcasters pay, technology has to be seen as serving sport and not the other way around.

AND ANOTHER THING...

You know things are getting serious stage at Rugby World Cups when the accusations of spying start flying around.

It has all become a bit more sophisticated since the days when Jim Telfer, then SRU director of rugby, was spotted in floppy hat and shades, filming a Tongan training session in 1995.

It has been going on for years, then and accusations have been levelled at an array of teams, invariably the tournament hosts, but in that knowledge would a smart coach like Michael Cheika, head coach of Australia who reckon hosts England may have been illicitly filming their training sessions this time around not just welcome the chance to sell a few dummies?