Officials should not be able to hear pundits such as Austin Healey during matches

Austin Healey divides opinion, he’s not the only pundit to do so. He had a stellar playing career, more than 200 appearances for Leicester, 51 England caps and two Lions tours. But, surely, the moment of his rugby life came in the 2001 Heineken Cup final, playing for Leicester versus Stade Français, in the 30-plus degrees heat of Paris. A match, incidentally, refereed outstandingly by Ireland’s David McHugh.

In desperate need of a try, coach Dean Richards found near divine inspiration. He moved Healey from scrumhalf to outhalf, and Leon Lloyd from centre to wing. With just a minute left on the clock, the newly appointed number 10 drifted wide from an untidy lineout and, taking a pass from Neil Back on halfway, he shredded Stade’s defence, a scintillating break that took him into the 22 before Lloyd was sent in for the winning try.

Nicknamed the “Leicester Lip”, Healey is famous for his sharp comments. Sometimes witty, sometimes very controversial, including when he found himself in hot water for a column that appeared in the Guardian during the 2001 Lions tour of Australia.

As a pundit Healey calls things quickly, he is never short of strong, dogmatic opinions. Often, he tell us the decision, long before the officials have reached their own conclusion. When he’s wrong, it’s irritating, but he’s just doing his job.

The Counter Ruck: the rugby newsletter from The Irish Times

---

Something has to give as Leinster and Northampton put double ambitions on the line

---

111 not out - Cian Healy’s longevity continues to impress as he eyes O’Gara’s appearance record

---

Sexton’s leadership vacuum will be felt as Leinster can’t replicate the emotion of La Rochelle match

---

The other day he was at it again, calling for a yellow card after an incident in a Saracens-Harlequins match before TMO Stuart Terheege had time to chat things over with referee Christophe Ridley. Terheege was overheard on the live broadcast telling the referee that he didn’t want to talk about a decision because “the problem I have got now is that it looks like Austin has instigated it, because we’re late”. Of course that was nonsensical, even though, it seems, Terheege had already decided that a card was not necessary.

That, of course, brings up the question of what audio feed the TMO can tune into. How easy it would be to be influenced by a former “great” in relation to a key, tight decision. Ignoring Brian O’Driscoll, for example, might prove a little difficult. I have always believed that it was impossible for TMOs to hear the live commentary, but this incident shows that some systems are not foolproof, and they probably vary depending on the competition, and the broadcaster set-up.

It might also explain the odd moments when a pundit makes a statement, quickly followed by a very similar opinion from the TMO, which doesn’t take much guessing as to where it may have originated. In the interests of credibility, this all needs to be fixed.

Luke McGrath had a Houdini-like escape on Friday evening. Referee Craig Evans and TMO Ben Whitehouse found a way out for the Leinster captain, despite the fact that “red card” was writ large over his uncontrolled, missile-style high hit on the Bulls’ try scorer Kurt-Lee Arendse.

There is a very simple law in the book: “A player must not do anything which is reckless or dangerous to others.” It’s a very important catch-all, ensuring that any and all foul play is covered; it fitted the bill precisely here. Some of the reported post-match pundit comments in favour of McGrath were totally misplaced.

The protocol is being assessed, to see whether TMO input can be reduced. Plenty of ideas, but all increase the chance for error, and team coaches will hardly be happy to concede tries that have contained even a small infringement in the build-up. Perhaps they would accept it initially, but I can see them running out of road pretty quickly, there is far too much at stake.

Just imagine the post-match chat. It could be only then that the referee learns of a significant infringement of which the TMO was not allowed to advise him during play. Impossible to explain, and it would expose the match officials to even more abuse. It is also fair to say that referees have become extremely used to the comfort blanket of the TMO, and some would be totally at sea if there was to be reduced input.

On occasion the TMO has continuous influence, making on-the-run calls to the referee that often do not require the game to be stopped. We hear referees asking, “check that for me please” and while sometimes we have an idea of what they’re talking about, other times it’s perplexing.

So, maybe there’s room for some protocol tweaking here, by insisting the referee judges what he sees, rather than waiting to hear confirmation. But, overall, the protocol has become so embedded into the fabric of the game that it’s hard to see room for radical change.

There is more divided opinion – as to whether TMO Brian MacNeice should have drawn the attention of referee Angus Gardner to a no-arms tackle that resulted in France being awarded the winning penalty against England. Frankly, I thought MacNeice was correct, and suggestions that the TMO should only call in what he believes may end up as a red card would not lessen dangerous play. The current system is far more of a necessary deterrent.

However, the biggest stumbling block to global consistency remains the existing divergence between the hemispheres as to what constitutes a red card, and what does not. It’s an extremely unhealthy problem that must be corrected, with alignment found. In the Six Nations we saw a consistent approach, but the difference in the southern hemisphere competitions is worrying. Unsurprisingly, of course, Down Under they see things completely the other way around.