You can view the page at http://www.rugbyrefs.com/content.php?381-Understanding-Clear-Obvious
Article: Understanding 'Clear & Obvious'
- Thread starter Robert Burns
- Start date
Ah, not true. It's running as an advert and already has 524 views via other mediums, & Brian Moore has tweeted about the irony of having to explain 'Clear & obvious". 
It's not mean to be broken down into individual bits. It's a term to mean unless I am 100% sure I am not blowing this whistle.
If it is clear that it is a Penalty offence then it is obvious that it is a Penalty offence.
EG
You see a punch land: It is both clear and obvious that a punch has landed therefore a Penalty offence has occured.
Alternatively:
A player come out of a maul with a bloody nose it is both clear and obvious that something happened. It its neither clear nor obvious what that "something" was.
EG
You see a punch land: It is both clear and obvious that a punch has landed therefore a Penalty offence has occured.
Alternatively:
A player come out of a maul with a bloody nose it is both clear and obvious that something happened. It its neither clear nor obvious what that "something" was.
It was obvious to you. On the scenario you propose nothing would be C & O as someone somewhere in the ground will not see it. C & O must be seen from the referee's perspective.
That's how I understand it.
Ie if it's a "grey area" between a clear black and white decision - it doesn't get blown.