In its fight for a cleaner sport free of dangerous gestures, World Rugby has introduced the bunker rule. First during test matches in the summer then during the World Cup in France. A complementary video tool for referees in case of doubt.
From the playing field, the officials had the possibility of issuing a yellow card and calling the bunker to examine the situation more closely. In eight minutes, two other referees, placed in an isolated room at the operational center of the World Cup at Roland-Garros, then decided the fate of the card: keep it or transform it into red. According to our notes, the figures for the World Cup, which included 48 matches, are as follows: the bunker was called 35 times for 27 yellow cards and 8 red cards. The referees also distributed 28 yellows without calling on the bunker while no direct red card was issued.
World Rugby has not yet communicated on this assessment and has not responded to our request for a debrief. Why was the “bunker” called? For the 35 cases, these were dangerous situations: high tackles, head-to-head collisions, violent clearances… On eight occasions, the bunker referees therefore decided to go red, including once in the final against Sam Cane, the first definitive exclusion in history at this stage of the competition.
The only official World Rugby referee to have spoken so far, Frenchman Mathieu Raynal does not question the usefulness of the bunker. “We would have needed more perspective to control it and make it a force,” he nevertheless regrets in the columns of Olympic Midday. Introducing it at the last moment exposed us because we did not completely master this new procedure and that put us in difficulty. » In particular, the differences between decisions, like the final between South Africa and New Zealand (12-11).
“It’s not bad to give some thought, some time”
Questioned this Friday at a press conference, Ugo Mola recalls that “at any moment when we innovate, there is a backlash to innovation”. “Namely, the analysis we make of it, the usefulness, the acceptance over time,” continues the Stade Toulouse coach. The bunker brought clarity to situations that might not have been possible with too early judgments, but it also brought confusion to decisions that everyone felt were easy to make. »
A direct player in the World Cup with the French team, Laurent Labit is delighted with the time saved on video call situations. “It’s not bad to give thought, time and above all to move on rather than the referee on the field being the only judge and asking for the video seven to eight times because he is hesitant , develops the new director of rugby at Stade Français. He is convinced that the minimum is yellow, a clear decision that allows play to resume. And at peace, when leaving the issue, another video referee is able to judge. »
“This is a development that worries me”
Speeding up the game was one of World Rugby’s goals. “It would be interesting to know how much playing time the bunker saved in this World Cup compared to traditional video calls,” asks Mathieu Raynal, quoted by Midi Olympique. Our consultant Pierre Berbizier warns about the more general use of video: “The final lost rhythm with all the appeals (Editor’s note: 5 in total, including 3 bunkers). This is a development that worries me. This external support was supposed to make the game easier and I don’t have the impression of it after the competition. »
Relieving responsibility of the main referee or real help, the question seems as much philosophical as it is useful for the authorities. World Rugby is reportedly considering keeping the bunker for major international matches, such as the Six Nations tournament. On the other hand, for the implementation in our championships, Top 14 or Pro D2, it seems too complex, if only for technical questions with 435 matches to referee throughout a season.
