Referee: Is it a try - yes or no?

Television Match Official: “There was no problem with the grounding; would you like more information from before the goal line?”

Referee: “Yes.”

Television Match Official: “It was a forward pass.”

South Africa's battling Tri-Nations victory over New Zealand in Port Elizabeth on Saturday will be remembered for many reasons - the gutsy return to form of the under-fire Springboks, the clear cracks in the All Blacks' armour and the intensity of the atmosphere. But those noteworthy facts may be over-shadowed by some maverick officiating.

A simple exchange between Irish referee George Clancy and South African TMO Johan Meuwesen, which followed what looked to be a second-half try for New Zealand, should, on the face of it be applauded. We often long for clear lines of communication between officials and on this occasion clarification was sought swiftly and the try was correctly ruled out as the pass from New Zealand's Israel Dagg to Cowan in the build up to the try was forward. The trouble is that in coming to the 'right' decision they broke the Laws of the game.

Current regulations are quite clear as to when the referee can call on the TMO and what information he can provide. The TMO can be consulted, "if the referee is unsure when making a decision in in-goal with regard to the scoring of a try or a touch down when foul play in-goal may have been involved." They can also be called on if the referee is, "unsure if a player was or was not in touch when attempted to ground the ball" and to clarify if a kick has passed between the posts.

There is no mention of providing clarity about incidents in the build-up to an act of scoring and as a result, Meuwesen's offer of 'more information' and his comment regarding the forward pass were clear breaches of protocol. Justice may have been done but the decision to play fast and loose with the regulations does not sit too well.

Clancy, who will referee at next month's World Cup starting with the opening game between New Zealand and Tonga, and Meuwesen can expect to be called to account for their actions by IRB referees boss Paddy O'Brien - unless there has been a directive on the matter that we have missed. But such an important change in policy would not have been made without some kind of fanfare.

In an ideal world, TMOs would be able to offer input outside of their current remit, using the sometimes amazing television technology available to broadcasters. But the IRB are aware that this is not as straightforward as it sounds - how would they interrupt the game? Would they only be able to rule on forward passes? Foul play? The breakdown? Scrums? A lot of questions and far too many for the IRB to process right now it would appear. Especially with a World Cup almost upon us.

So instead, we must add this latest high-profile blunder to that involving referee Jonathan Kaplan and touch judge Peter Allan during this year's Six Nations clash between Wales and Ireland in Cardiff when we were screaming for the TMO Geoff Warren to bring some sense to proceedings. On that occasion a strict adherence to protocol resulted in injustice whereas the opposite occurred in Port Elizabeth.

There is clearly a need for a review of the current regulations and failure to address these concerns and embrace the added clarity technology can provide could result in yet more embarrassment. Let us hope that the sport's showpiece event is not blighted by such self-induced trauma.