Planet Rugby readers are never short of an opinion and our mail box is seldom empty. This week, one of our readers wants the referee's job made easier.
Got an opinion? We'd like to hear it, so why not send us an email HERE.
Blame the ref, everyone else does
By Gareth Hughes
"The trouble with referees is that they don't care which side wins!" - Tom Canterbury
As Wayne Barnes trundled his way around the field while presiding over the Heineken Cup semi-final between Clermont and Leinster the crowd began to vent its frustration at him. Reflecting afterwards about the lot of referees, it would be fair to say that several times this season Mr Barnes and his colleagues have left rugby followers baffled, stumped and bewildered.
The best referees are the ones you do not notice. Rugby union is a complicated game in its own right. This wonderful intricacy is augmented by the amalgam of players and coaches attempting in every game to push the envelope of the rules and laws of the game to their limits in order to gain a winning advantage. It takes three groups to make a good game of rugby union. Firstly, the players who carry out the instructions of their coaches; the coaches and their batteries of backroom staff who come up with a "Game plan"; then the person that generally cops it for the game failing to live up to expectations, well that will be the third member of the triumvirate, the referee. Their fate is all too often out of their hands.
For the referee the task has now reached monumental perhaps unsustainable levels. Scrutiny has become almost forensic. Accountability comes hand in hand with any profession but the referee is all too often utilised as the means of dissipating the accountability of others. Errors by the referee are put forwards as the sole reason for a bad result, a poor performance and so on. Coaches, Directors of rugby, players, commentators and pundits go over the referees' performance with the impunity of vultures dismembering a carcass with the benefits of hindsight and technology to criticise and vilify. Very little acknowledgement of the referee's place as a human being, prone therefore to the same failings as any other, are ever acknowledged. As the attacks on referees grow the uniqueness of rugby's position of being above other sports in their treatment of the referee is in grave danger of being lost.
Graham Henry advocated at one point the need for more that one referee and assistants. Fitness was the area that Henry was most concerned with, and perhaps he has a point. Several sports use more than one official because of the speed of the game; American football, hockey and ice hockey. Fitness levels do need to be enhanced. The ability to keep up with play more proficiently would allow for a more and proactive approach, as they would be closer to the action. The referee has to react quickly and being on the spot through a combination of anticipation and stamina can only add to the quality of control.
On the other hand both teams must want to play an expansive and entertaining game. If that happens then the referee can buy into it and enter what is called euphemistically "The spirit of the game". But, that is where all too often where the issues begin. How many teams are truly committed to the concept of creating entertaining rugby or is the need to win a far more vital consideration.
The scrum
This is unique to rugby; it should not be allowed to degenerate into a means of merely restarting the game. When was the last time a hooker was penalised for "foot up"? This has been allowed to deteriorate from a contest of strength, cunning, courage, and balance into a duel between two herds of charging buffalo. The need to "chase the space" has meant more reset and collapsed scrums than ever. Yet the answer is still there enshrined in the laws of the game. Make the scrum-half feed the ball into the scrum correctly, in other words straight, so that the hooker has to strike to win the ball. In an instant the contest is revived and so will the need for straight and firm scrums.
The breakdown
Make it simple for all of us but especially the referee. By stopping players flopping all over the ball their sole purpose to slow the ball down, get their defence organised and prevent what everyone else wants, tries. Perhaps, the best way to clear up the breakdown would be returning to old fashioned rucking. Clearing out over the ball, would produce quick ball, faster and more entertaining rugby.
Referees jobs made easier; players understand their roles better; a superior game for all concerned. Maybe we can then stop blaming the ref.
Comments
backnforward says...
For what seems ages now I have said that the major problems in the modern (aka professional) game revolve the NOT implementing the current rules. If referees where more consistent in stopping players at the breakdown from flopping over to slow the ball down the game would speed up. The rule quite clearly states "shoulders no lower than their hips..." Therefore, if you are on your feet with your hands on the floor whilst you trying to win the ball (bridging), it is a penalty - unless of course you are a contortionist!
The problem is now going to become even more exacerbated with the introduction of a trial by the RFU with more power to the TMO for in-field offences. Crikey the touch judges (and some referees) make so few decisions already we may as well do away with them and just give them some loudspeakers so that a panel of TMOs can referee the game. And how many stoppages will there be on top of the repeated reset of scrums? Watch the fans desert the game in droves as it descends in to 80 minutes of players and spectators waiting around for a decision.
It's not rocket science! Implement the rules vigorously and consistently AND re-instil discipline and respect into the players. And not just respect for the officials but for other players and spectators. No more pat-on-the-heads, throwing the ball away to stop quick throws or taps, no questioning or talking back to the referee and certainly no over-celebrations by the players - especially the kissing and cuddling like footballers or, worse still, the pathetic dance as performed by Cipriani!!!
Perhaps this will make the on-field officials jobs easier and therefore their game more enjoyable. Remember, without a referee there is no game...
Posted 13:03 16th May 2012
APV1 says...
@ Stellenbosched2 - only if they come to attention, snap up a salute and address him as, "Oh referee! MY referee!" and reply to his every word with, "Sir! Yes sir!"
Now... May I have your leave to carry on, Sir please?!
Posted 09:51 14th May 2012
blindmice says...
NIce comments towards the ref etc etc. However, how hard is it to referee a game of rugby??? Guess what, if you are good enough, not that hard...
it is a job like other jobs that has its learning prerequisites, experience prerequisites. It has people who are good at the job and people that are so so at the job. Theoretically it has the best people on the job at the top, or does it??
Before getting flamed, i am a current referee, have refereed at international level for 15s over several years and officiated at many IRB World Series 7s events over a number of years. My 15s International matches included teams at the 2011 RWC so i feel adequately experienced to discuss here. I am also a senior executive in a company that turns over in excess of USD 100m.
My question is that are the current crop of top tier referees, the best referees? We all have our motivations whether we take a job or not. Salary, lifestyle, professional progression, enjoyment etc. So does the IRB or the unions provide a pathway that will attract and retain the best possible resource for referees? I had an opportunity to follow the IRB pathway, but it would have involved a huge pay cut and leaving my family behind for long period's of time. The compensation offered did not equate to the sacrifices that had to be made. There in lies the question. Are the best referees or potentially the best actually progressing to the top tier?
The laws are complicated yes, but not overly so. An ability to multitask and process information in front of you quickly are the hallmarks of a good referee, as well as an empathy for the game and fitness and keep your head in front of 100,000 hostile fans.
There are several of these people at the top, but how many more could there be with a package that would attract more people like Craig Joubert et al? That is where the IRB needs to focus on.
Posted 11:19 13th May 2012
Stellenbosched2 says...
Hi APV1
I think you are onto something re the military. Yes, I also had to salute my arm off in the army. So why don't we make a new law that forces the players to salute the ref as they run on, and then every time he talks to a player in person? Can imagine how it would make B Lawrences day.
Posted 07:47 12th May 2012
jontheref says...
Agreed, needed to be said.
The scrum.
Coach the ref to evaluate who took it down.
In many cases, the player who took it down, is the one who is on the ground, having protected himself.
The player penalised is often the player still on his feet!
Breakdown.
Penalise the offence of taking a player to ground at the breakdown, who is on his feet, trying to win the ball.
The taking of him to ground, is negative, so penalise it.
We want quick ball, the man on his feet is trying to do that.
When the refs calls hands away blue/red, and that team then palys the bal, penalie them.
This is repeatedly ignored, and I cannot see why there is such a disconnect with the refs on this.
Forget "interpretations" apply the laws as written, OR change them.
That way we can all decide. It is almost as if they are trying to bring some mystique into it, using smoke and mirrors to justify the decisions.Offside in front of kicker.
Last year flavour of the month, this year applied in a patchy fashion, some refs, some of the time.
The refs seminars talk about "materiality", well they don't appear to get that right!
I know it is difficult, but trying to impose a style on referees will not work, and penalty count based assessents is plain stupid.
If there deserves to be 60 penalities in a game, I would ask the ref why he did not use cards to reduce them, and if he did, it is the players who are at fault, not the ref.
Posted 10:43 11th May 2012
APV1 says...
@ The Poster Formally Known As Stellenbosched - you're right that respect is earned, but a person in an official capacity should automatically start with a minimum level of respect given.
Consider military service. When I served in the Army, I saluted a senior officer, regardless of whether I knew them or not. Some say that you're saluting the rank, not the person. But that's my point. The person in authority, be it a referee or senior officer, has earned automatic respect, purely on their position alone.
I think it's then their responsibility to prove that they deserve that respect and ensure that it's not lost.
And with regards to the "back 10" issue, England had better be very careful when we're touring. Steyne has an uncanny ability to kick penalties from anywhere in the oppositions' half and, it seems, almost from his own 22! So we need to not make his life easier and keep our mouths shut. I think that Robshaw will prove his worth as a captain in this respect. He is respectful and doesn't get over-vocal (if that makes sense). He listens to the ref, discusses the issue with them and then goes back to his player / team and gives them the feedback. There are rarley histrionics or melodrama from him and I think we'll need that calm authority when facing up the the Boks.
And we all know that Saffas are all cheats, whether players or refs. So we don't have much chance, do we?!
;-)
lol
imho
lmao
pmsl
roflmao
Posted 10:10 11th May 2012
Stellenbosched2 says...
Hi staph
I think you are just as eloquent as Gareth.
I agree with the idea that refs should be respected, and APV1 I also don't know why we don't see more 'backward marching'. I would like to add though that respect is not given, it is earned. In my humble opinion (I must be the first person to actually write that in 3 years) too many refs play to the home crowds these days. The number of penalties given by refs to home and visiting teams is way out of balance, which is a problem for me when we come back to respecting the ref.
Posted 06:18 11th May 2012
APV1 says...
A great letter and a sentiment we should all heed.
I'll add to the list of gripes, where the hooker stands at the line out. Why are they not pinged for overstepping the line?!
And let's face it, the ref would not be blowing his whistle if the players didn't cheat or make mistakes. So surely we need to forgive those times when a ref misses something...
And respect at all times. The refs need to set the tone for the match in the first few minutes and set out their stall. There should be more teams being "marched back 10" for back-chat and insubordination. Any dialogue should be with the captains, who shopuyld then feedback to their teams.
That said, refereeing howlers should be acknowledged as such, and perhaps the TJs and TMOs should be given the authority to stop a game if the ref has missed something or got it wrong.
Posted 17:17 10th May 2012
staph_glorious says...
"the respect of both the teams and the knowledgeable public for the referee. Loose that and rugby will simply become a poorer relative of soccer."
I can't agree with this. The laws of rugby union, those that protect the game's basic mechanics, are what contribute to it being a superior sport to soccer. Even if every fan were a turd-throwing, blood-thirsting pyromaniac (trust me - it's a demograph!), as long as the fundamental play in the game remained, I would be as committed a fan as ever, and I would expect the same of anyone who claimed to be in love with rugby.
I mean, right now I camp out in the North Stand at the RDS, and my iPod drowns out a monotony of mindless heckles. Bliss and heaven!...gorgeousness and gorgeousity!
Posted 17:07 10th May 2012
staph_glorious says...
Did I write this? Well, if only I were as eloquent!
I would add a fourth group to the piece, they being the lawmakers. While fitness and technical proficiency belong to the referees, the lawmakers must ensure a sport delivers for all three parties mentioned in this piece. This is, essentially, how the article concludes, so forgive me my blind eye to subtext!
The scrum and the breakdown are truly the main concerns. Law trials and law amendments ought to, almost exclusively, deal with this facet of the game. I consider any move otherwise by the IRB a concession of their sole duty to the health of their sport.
Thanks for the words, Gareth, and for the opportunity, PR.
Posted 16:16 10th May 2012
PTplayer says...
Gareth, what a good and balanced comment. Couldn't agree more.
I particularly enjoyed your lines on the need to respect the referee.
One thing that for me has always differentiated rugby - at least in the old days - was the respect of both the teams and the knowledgeable public for the referee. Loose that and rugby will simply become a poorer relative of soccer.
Yes, referees are human. Yes they make mistakes. However, vilifying a referee will only be to the detriment of our beloved sport.the detriment of our beloved sport.
Posted 15:40 10th May 2012