Referees

[Mark62]

Talking of ex players who become referees one of the best I've seen (although I admit only on the TV) is Glenn Jackson the ex Sarries fly half.

There seem to be a few down under Jamie nutt Brown is also doing well

[LE18]

Could there possibly be some bias against him because he has a posh sounding double barrel name. Not a problem to me.

[BFG]

Could there possibly be some bias against him because he has a posh sounding double barrel name. Not a problem to me.

His name could be Ken Co and I'd still think he made the same mistakes on Sunday!

[Mark62]

Could there possibly be some bias against him because he has a posh sounding double barrel name. Not a problem to me.

What a strange post, he could be Alf Smith as far as I’m concerned his name doesn’t impact on his performance

[Ian Cant]

I honestly believe that the TMO has had a negative effect on many refs: intentionally or not refs now know they can refer or have the TMO refer to indiscretions so have become less focussed on what is happening. Same applies to the refs assistants. Cricket and tennis seem to have it right with referrals! Not sure how this could be implemented but at least the refs could then be more decisive in what they do. TV doesn’t help the refs either as everyone can see everything that happens. Keys yesterday though, did get in some strange places to ref! Missed things for both sides. It is the inconsistency that is beyond belief at the moment especially the high tackle rule!

[NewarkTiger]

I think CMK seems to officiate well enough and I believe he HAS improved whilst I've been watching the prem matches (btw I have NO refs on my Xmas card list ). However....from my POV it is still his, as with other refs, inconsistency that irks the most. I know we are not next to the rucks but there seemed to be differing decisions on how much time he would allow before blowing for late jackalling or holding on. A lottery of sorts??? Neither he nor his assistants seemed to worry too much about phase play off side for either team, so I was very pleased to see us note this and start to creep a few feet in the second half. In summary, he was better than we were as some have already said but still making infuriatingly inconsistent decisions. Did we get the rub of the green? I dont think so but ive only got 1 eye!!! Good to see Steve Diamond hasn't lost his sense of humour in the post match.

[Not a jock]

Upper Management and I support different clubs teams and different national teams so we often support opposing sides in a match. Even with the benefit of endless TV replays and the TMO's voice-over we frequently disagree on what we expect the outcome of a decision to be.

When I compare some of the comments on this forum to what I've seen on TV, I wonder if we've been watching the same match so I believe some of the criticism of referees is from a biased perspective. Also, I've never seen a matched referred by the likes of Barnes or Owens in which they haven't made a few mistakes so it's not reasonable to expect all refs to be perfectly consistent and accurate, especially when their lines of sight are obscured by 30 closely packed big and even bigger lumps. Added to that, the players are coached to push the laws to the limit by which I mean trying not to get caught too often that it negates the advantages of cheating!

No wonder very few ex-payers want to be refs - much easier and more lucrative to spout drivel on TV (Flatman excepted).

[ourla]

Good post Not a jock. Just on the players pushing the boundary side. When Bateman got pinged at the scrum on the TV they showed how his opposite number had very subtly pulled his arm down. It was the sort of thing "cheating Leicester" were once famous for. Very difficult to spot. You see this quite often on the telly. Sometimes it gets picked up by the officials, sometimes not. Rugby is a very technical game and there is a lot goes on at close quarters, and at speed.

[BFG]

I've had a small go at it and found the line of sight was the most difficult aspect.
For me though I still believe that refs make it more difficult than it should be.
Using the ruck as an example, tacklers are supposed to release and roll away immediately, and away meaning away from the tackled player and ball, on the ball presentation side is not away, that's the first thing that must be followed, and then players entering the ruck are supposed to be on their feet and use both arms, head not below hips as that is sealing off, going off feet is only allowed once beyond the ball, simple basic foundations for a clean game that are allowed to be ignored to the point it's messy for all.
The scrum is another example, the feed is supposed to be straight, it's supposed to be a hooking contest first but instead they allow crooked feeds which in turn becomes an immediate pushing contest which again in turn becomes a mess.
Relaxed officiating relates to so much, even the offside laws and the creation of what is now a physically dominated sport with a desparate need to reduce impacts.
You can blame the players for pushing the laws but in the end the man with the whistle is in charge!

[johnthegriff]

I didn't think the ref was too bad. I re watched the game on TV and there were instances where I thought he was wrong but there always is with any ref, I have certainly seen worse than Maxwell-Keys. I was told a year or so ago that according to official statistics Wayne Barnes was correct in his decisions just 75% of the time, the average for other refs in the Premiership is only 65% . I don't know if things have improved with all the input available these days but if it has it doesn't show. Maybe as time goes by we will see retired top level refs acting as TMO's instead of people whose credentials are not clear, I am delighted to see ex players with the whistle as they bring an insight that those that have not played at the top level cannot have.
However we must bare in mind that two people will always see the game and an incident differently and it is only the refs opinion that counts. We have just had a prime example with the discussion over Spencer's red card, many with opposing views expressed honestly after seeing the incident many times have still not changed their opinion (me included), so it is inevitable that almost whenever the whistle blows someone will disagree with the decision.

[daktari]

For me, its not that mistakes are made or things missed, its always going to happen...its the non-reffing especially stepping off side at the break down and off the feet at the breakdown - for the love of God, ping them!

[DingDong]

If you only listen to the poor law judgements of pundits like Healey, Kay and Flatman, then you'll end up with all the rest of the pantomime brigade who aren't really interested in what happens, just want to have their hissing and booing heard.

Some examples:
1. Crowd boo because CM-K correctly refers to the TMO for a clear forward pass denying Tigers a try.
2. Crowd boo because CM-K correctly denies a quick throw because OTY appears to be seriously injured, safety first.
3. Healey rants about GT's obstruction when the Curry opted to tackle GT thinking he was receiving the ball, instead of tackling Cole (the receiver) who was not obstructed had he chose to tackle him.
4. Healey rants about Kitch not rolling away, he was, got pinned by a red player, ball was always available to the 9 who in fact had his hands on the ball straight after GT.
4. Healey rants about Adam T tackling yard into touch being a penalty, Yarde sort of blocked/shielded the ball (PK if not in possession), Adam T sort of collided due to the blocking, 6 of one half a dozen of the other - play on!

Points 3 & 4 were borderline (especially 3) calls, these happen every game and some may go the other way next time, that doesn't make it bad reffing in the context and speed of the game. Some daft calls, some missed calls but overall a good game from CM-K.

[ourla]

I was told a year or so ago that according to official statistics Wayne Barnes was correct in his decisions just 75% of the time, the average for other refs in the Premiership is only 65% .

Would like to see the details of that study. I'll admit, I am highly sceptical.

[voice of the crumbie]

I was told a year or so ago that according to official statistics Wayne Barnes was correct in his decisions just 75% of the time, the average for other refs in the Premiership is only 65% .

Would like to see the details of that study. I'll admit, I am highly sceptical.

Of those refs who were 65% right for the average to stack up some would have been above 65% and some lower. Having watched CMK a number of times I wouldn't be surprised to find that he was one of those lower than 65%. Having said that I echo the points made by others in this discussion that the things that frustrate fans and players the most are inconsistent decisions by the same ref in the same match and failure to correctly apply or, in some cases, apply at all the laws of the game

[Mark62]

What is really interesting is that I put in my OP that I didn’t want to go on about CMK , this was more about up and coming refs. Yet 3 pages later people are still discussing him.

He obviously stirred up some emotions