|
| IMPORTANT Remember to read the rules of the board and abide by them when posting. |
Standard of refs |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |||
mdg99 
World Cup Winner 
Joined: 26 May 2012 Location: Buckingham Status: Offline Points: 328 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Standard of refsPosted: 16 Jun 2012 at 18:40 |
||
|
Having watched the England game earlier, I am astounded at the standard of reffing in particular at international level. How on earth the first try was given, I do not know!!!! But it is not just that decision, The scrum was once again poorly reffed, and it seemed to be a lottery as to who got the penalty (except for one against Dan Cole when he dropped the bind) The South African tight head replacement did not once bind where he was meant to and was constantly on Corbiseriero's arm. This is such an easy penalty to give I just do not understand how refs, (not just Alain Rolland) cannot see this and act upon it. I hope after this Rolland, but also Walsh are disciplined what was a very poor officiating performance.
Rant over
 |
|||
 |
|||
|
RedOrDead
World Cup Winner
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Status: Offline Points: 3738 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Jun 2012 at 14:05 |
||
|
The worrying question is what can be done about this? These guys are the top referees on the planet who get plenty of resources thrown at them and constant assessment, yet we still get numerous, regular gaffs. This is particularly frustrating as the ability of referees to police scrums effectively has been under the microscope since the 2003 World Cup final and in particular at the last World Cup.
Does anyone think there is an argument for reviewing the way that the TMO process works too? I understand that we don't want the game held up for 5 minutes while the TMO goes back 10 phases, but any protocol when the TMO doesn't / isn't able to rule "penalty try" straight away over Ben Youngs' near decapitation seems like it needs review to me.
|
|||
|
|||
|
mdg99
World Cup Winner
Joined: 26 May 2012 Location: Buckingham Status: Offline Points: 328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Jun 2012 at 17:41 |
||
|
i agree red dead, the tmo should be able to make decisions that the ref can not see/misses. It is like in cricket, with the review system, they have accepted that umpires are fallible and have put in a contingency plan to cope, maybe something to consider in rugby? there have been some stuff done like the white cards but not enough. If england were able to "review" alberts "try" it could have changed the momentum of the game
|
|||
|
|||
|
SIlverFox
British and Irish Lion 
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 Status: Offline Points: 280 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Jun 2012 at 21:37 |
||
|
While one hates to be the voice of reason, I would just point out that in the 3 main tests this weekend (sorry Fiji/Scotland) there were 123 missed tackles and 41 handling errors. Lets keep focussed on the players errors and mistakes as well!
Sure Mr Walsh will be disappointed in allowing that first try. But lets not pretend the game outcome was caused by the officials. re binding - I cannot fathom why clubs/national Unions/shirt manufacturers dont sort the shirts issue out. Its crazy to mandate that binding must be on the sleeve and yet the design of the shirts makes this impossible. |
|||
|
|||
|
mdg99
World Cup Winner
Joined: 26 May 2012 Location: Buckingham Status: Offline Points: 328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Jun 2012 at 22:12 |
||
|
silverfox, that is the point i was making, you cant bind on the arm/sleeve it has to be on the back of the shirt, but your point about the tight shirts is true, it makes it very difficult to get the initial bind (from personal experience).
No denying there were a huge number of mistakes from all the sides but they are something as a team you can control, whereas refereeing blunders like the one made by Steve Walsh and general incompetence at scrum time are things that can be sorted through extra powers to the tmo so he can help out the man in the middle who does a very difficult job (again from personal experience)
|
|||
|
|||
|
RedOrDead
World Cup Winner
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Status: Offline Points: 3738 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 17 Jun 2012 at 22:47 |
||
Just once it would be nice to see you log in and say "yeah, the ref had a shocker, what was he smoking?" - top level referees are professionals the same as the players they are in charge of, if a player has a poor game, pundits will identify it, why shouldn't referees be the same? The attitude that players make mistakes so it's OK for referees to make them too is one that I've never heard before and one that I suspect would cause outcry if it were widely publicised. I've got quite broad sporting interests and can't think of any other sport where referees make anywhere near the number of mistakes that rugby referees make, if these figures were collated and made public, the sport would become a laughing stock. I accept that to err is human, but the attitude of springing instantly to referees' defence in every instance rather than offering suggestions to improve matters wears thin pretty quickly.
I don't think anyone was trying to pretend that, although if you can say with 100% certainty that it didn't, your grasp of probability is very poor or you're the world's most successful sports pundit! Are you trying to suggest that mistakes only really matter if they definitely alter the outcome of the game?
This is the kind of suggestion my original question was trying to elicit  . This suggestion has been banded about for quite a while now. Presumably you're privy to information that most of us aren't, has this by those responsible for altering the laws?A review system of sorts appears to work American Football, do you think it could be made to work in top level Rugby Union?
Edited by RedOrDead - 17 Jun 2012 at 22:48 |
|||
|
|||
|
BeeBumble
World Cup Winner
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Location: Caldy Status: Offline Points: 522 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Jun 2012 at 01:32 |
||
|
Officials have always made mistakes and our acceptance that they're always right - even though they may actually have been wrong - is one of the key values which many in the world outside rugby see as differentiating it from the round ball game.
I've recently watched the ridiculous spectacle of five officials trying to ensure that their man in the middle gets it right with two focussing their attention on the goal line and I have to wonder how those who would obsessively manage every detail of every play in any game will be able to resist the temptation to appoint specialists or, more likely, drench the field of play from every angle with slow motion cameras producing fodder for TMOs and interrupting and delaying the the natural flows. Well, that'd be fine if you want something akin to Americam football with flags flying in from all angles and referees turning on the public address systems to explain their corporate decisions directly to those present and the TV audience to say nothing of the prospect of two or three hours games but it's not for me. My thoughts are that we need to back to the basics of three officials working together to ensure that the players are safe, that most infringements are dealt with according to much simpler and in some cases more robust interpretations of the laws and that points scored are recorded correctly. We should also remove any responsibility for making a game flow or be otherwise entertaining cos that's something that the ones who understand and manage the players properly get right anyway and those who don't and have to rely on instruction never will! Three officials (I'll accept that the use of wireless as a positive), one whistle, less tolerance of feeding, back rows breaking off, guys off their feet at rucks, forward passes, dangerous tackles etc and, please, pretty please, some common sense laws of engagement at the scrum! And so to bed! |
|||
|
Me? I'm just buzzin' around!
|
|||
|
|||
|
mdg99
World Cup Winner
Joined: 26 May 2012 Location: Buckingham Status: Offline Points: 328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Jun 2012 at 14:03 |
||
|
BEE, although in principle that would be great i think that the occurances of such high profile gaffs have become more common and have to be dealt with. Obviously we dont want the flow of the game to be disrupted (its what separates our game from the likes of NFL where it is all stop start and no creativity) But surely it will not cause disruption if the the tmo has a quiet word in the earpiece at a break in play to highlight stuff. I am not suggesting he calls every forward pass etc but surely when the rules of the game have been completely forgotten as was the case with SA's first try there should be a "safety net" so that these mistakes are prevented and do not have such an effect upon the outcomem of matches.
|
|||
|
|||
|
RedOrDead
World Cup Winner
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Status: Offline Points: 3738 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Jun 2012 at 14:58 |
||
|
Interesting post BumbleBee, to an extent I agree with the "ref's always right, even when he isn't" attitude, but IMO this slightly quaint attitude belongs back in the amateur era. Since the advent of professionalism, the game has evolved to be much faster and (I believe) more cynical and now attracts more and more in depth media attention. For what ever reason, I believe that refereeing has failed to evolve to keep pace with these changes. Although I can't claim to recall the amateur era all that well, I certainly don't recall the number of highly controversial or out and out wrong decisions we experience these days.
I share your concerns about slowing the game down, and agree the the law makers would have to be very aware of this when testing any changes, but if any proposed change is met with such a dismissive attitude rather than an open mind and keenness to come up with something workable, I'm afraid the disparity in the pace of evolution is doomed to continue.
|
|||
|
|||
|
mdg99
World Cup Winner
Joined: 26 May 2012 Location: Buckingham Status: Offline Points: 328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Jun 2012 at 20:24 |
||
|
well said red, eloquently put (at least better than I could) :P
|
|||
|
|||
|
BeeBumble
World Cup Winner
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Location: Caldy Status: Offline Points: 522 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Jun 2012 at 21:37 |
||
|
Sorry, DeadorRed, I wasn't aware that I actually dismissed anything never mind anything of note and I'm not sure that being keen to see our game refereed according to its laws and traditional spirit can be viewed as either quaint or unworkable when even a cursory review might suggest that this was a pretty revolutionary and desirable concept!
|
|||
|
Me? I'm just buzzin' around!
|
|||
|
|||
|
RedOrDead
World Cup Winner
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Status: Offline Points: 3738 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Jun 2012 at 01:20 |
||
|
If you want to edit this post for readability, I'll happily respond to it, but a sentence about the laws of the game that manages to avoid punctuation for so many consecutive words is more than my post pub brain can cope with!
|
|||
|
|||
|
Post Reply
|
|
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
SIlverFox wrote: