The TMO question

Hi all.

Simple question really. Why does the ref sometimes ask "Is it a try yes or no?" And other times "Is there any reason I cannot award the try?". It's not a question of linguistics as both questions suggest a different default. The first wants proof of a try being scored and the second wants proof that a try was averted. The decision on the England try that wasn't yesterday could have been different had the question been different. Very much like the Ryan Jones try that wasn't allowed against Ireland. Apologies if this has been covered but I can't see a thread dedicated to it.

In conclusion if the TMO is there for one reason and that is to validate if a try has been scored then can it not be decided then one question and one question only should be asked of them?

If the ref thinks it is a try but wants confirmation " any reason not to award a try" if the ref is unsure or unsighted - "try yes or no"

- "Any Reason I Can't Award a Try" is when the referee is happy enough a try has been scored but just double checking with TMO.

- "Is it a Try, Yes or No" is when the referee is hasnt a bloody clue.

Personally I feel there should only be one question. Ireland lost a 6 Nations on the result of this question in 2007. England lost the match yesterday due to a question. If ref simply asked TMO different words with same footage there would be massive changes. Its too inconsistent.

Should that be the case though? The fact that he has asked the TMO to look at it suggests he doesn't know if it is a try so logically wouldn't it make sense for him not to bias the TMO in his phrasing of the question?

george your raising an argument that is used alot due to the review system in cricket- basically if something cant be proved otherwise you stick to the umpires original decision- not sure if thats right or not in all honesty, but thats the jist of it