Has Rugby Got a Refereeing Problem?

[AViewFromLe2]

Evening all!

Now this may be a slightly controversial piece but given both our game yesterday and then the England game afterwards was affected by refereeing decisions, I decided to write this about my concern for the game and the referees. For me, what happened yesterday was not a one-off and part of the trend that has come in over the last couple of seasons with the officials.

Now this is not a blame the referee exercise. As I say in the piece, both Tigers & England deserved to lose. But the decisions that were made did have a material factor in how the game panned out.

So what do you think, does rugby have a refereeing problem or am I being too harsh or worried about a problem that does not exist?

https://aviewfromle2.wixsite.com/websit ... ng-problem

[jgriffin]

Evening all!

Now this may be a slightly controversial piece but given both our game yesterday and then the England game afterwards was affected by refereeing decisions, I decided to write this about my concern for the game and the referees. For me, what happened yesterday was not a one-off and part of the trend that has come in over the last couple of seasons with the officials.

Now this is not a blame the referee exercise. As I say in the piece, both Tigers & England deserved to lose. But the decisions that were made did have a material factor in how the game panned out.

So what do you think, does rugby have a refereeing problem or am I being too harsh or worried about a problem that does not exist?

https://aviewfromle2.wixsite.com/websit ... ng-problem

Rugby has several problems. There are simple solutions to most of them (especially the 'breakdown' aka the tackle area), but in order to 'make the game a spectacle', such solutions are ignored. Equally ignored at the higher levels are forward passes, knock-ons and dangerous play (e.g. leaping into opponents). It's the whole of rugby administration that is at fault. The 'referee problem' is caused by this 'make a spectacle' ideal, where refs do not seem to adjudicate equally or consistently, and one must assume the panels fail to educate the refs into consistency. there is an almost universal progression (cf Karl Dickson, and indeed, Gauzere) from firm and fair in their first season to irrational and inconsistent by season 3. So don't blame individual refs, blame the whole system.

[SthrnTiger]

Evening all!

Now this may be a slightly controversial piece but given both our game yesterday and then the England game afterwards was affected by refereeing decisions, I decided to write this about my concern for the game and the referees. For me, what happened yesterday was not a one-off and part of the trend that has come in over the last couple of seasons with the officials.

Now this is not a blame the referee exercise. As I say in the piece, both Tigers & England deserved to lose. But the decisions that were made did have a material factor in how the game panned out.

So what do you think, does rugby have a refereeing problem or am I being too harsh or worried about a problem that does not exist?

https://aviewfromle2.wixsite.com/websit ... ng-problem

Rugby has several problems. There are simple solutions to most of them (especially the 'breakdown' aka the tackle area), but in order to 'make the game a spectacle', such solutions are ignored. Equally ignored at the higher levels are forward passes, knock-ons and dangerous play (e.g. leaping into opponents). It's the whole of rugby administration that is at fault. The 'referee problem' is caused by this 'make a spectacle' ideal, where refs do not seem to adjudicate equally or consistently, and one must assume the panels fail to educate the refs into consistency. there is an almost universal progression (cf Karl Dickson, and indeed, Gauzere) from firm and fair in their first season to irrational and inconsistent by season 3. So don't blame individual refs, blame the whole system.

Similarly I don’t think individual referee’s are to blame and although they make mistakes (as we all do!) think they are genuinely trying to referee to the highest standard they can. I imagine like the players that refereeing standards are the highest they have ever been -its just all the additional camera angles puts much more scrutiny on them

The problem rugby has (in particular international rugby) is that the referee’s decisions are often pivotal in the outcome of the game and also inconsistent with no doubt the same scrum/break-down being assessed by different referee’s leading to penalties awarded to different teams which in a game of fine margins can lead to different results.

This can make the game frustrating to watch even for die-hard fans so not surprising the game struggles to become more than a niche sport. Not sure I can think of a solution other than the sport investing more in making sure it has the very best referee’s possible as the quality of the referee can be more important for the quality of the game then any of the players!

[RichieB]

As with most high profile professional sports, there is such a lot of analysis - cameras everywhere and every decision dissected. I don’t think I’d want to be a referee.

Having said that, both of the refs you mentioned this weekend made significant contribution to spoiling the flow of the game. It seems that certain referees (Owens, latterly Barnes) are more skilled at keeping the game going without overlooking obvious infringements. A tough balance to achieve.

[Tigerbeat]

One of the major issues is that we are moving from an experienced group of Refs losing Barnes soon, Owens but we do not have sufficient refs at that standard globally.
Domestic refs standards are lower than what we have experienced....why....are fewer people wanting to take the abuse that comes along, the cameras that put pressure on them and highlight mistakes.
Not an easy job.

[ourla]

In general, no.

[ourla]

Often when you watch a game they show the statistics of how many missed tackles a team makes. Which is just one of the errors they can make it. Then think about how many poor decisions the ref made in comparison. Especially now with the TMO there are actually very few errors.

[chappie]

Me personally I would like to see more Ex players becoming referees.
There is a big difference between a club rugby player becoming a ref than a player that has played at the highest level becoming a ref is they have a better understanding to what is actually unfolding in front on them because they have been there in the past as a former professional.

If you take cricket the best umpires are all ex players who understand and know every trick in the book about what goes on during a match.

The TMO should also be a ex pro as the current lot make to many snap judgments and in some cases advise the ref incorrectly which in turn just spoils the game.

Apart from Owens and Barns I can’t think of any decent refs in the UK.

[ourla]

Karl Dickson was a pro player and he seems to get slated as much as any other ref.

[longlivethecrumbie]

In contrast, I think that Craig Maxwell-Keys is improving. As my fellow terrace dweller of the 10m line will attest, he wasn't one of the refs that exuded confidence in previous seasons but he has been pretty good this year from what I've seen. Also Matt Carley is one of the better younger generation of refs and also Luke Pearce is gaining recognition at international level and I also think he's pretty good and I've been impressed with the way he has reffed games this year. None of them has played rugby at a high level and also neither has Wayne Barnes. I remember that he was given a large amount of stick early in his career and has gone on to improve out of sight to be the best in the business.

For me, what doesn't help is the varying role of the TMO and when they interject. Each ref uses the crew around them in different ways and I think that rugby could benefit from an NFL style system where the ref, touch judges, TMO and citing officer work as a crew consistently.

[kk20gb30]

Decisions will always be subjective and interpretations will always vary.
The man in the middle will always tend to have a bearing on matches due to his decisions ; a case of extent however.

[Pellsey]

I believe the general answer IMHO is yes. However, I think the current rules and general interpretation of the rules play a large part in the problems we have.

For example, if a referee has never played the game at a high enough level to understand certain circumstances, then they are more likely to blindly follow rules. I do not know, but I do not believe, that the TMO we have unfortunately had for the last 2 weeks has much experience in the game, and blindly lays out the rules without unstanding the circumstances very well, seemingly IMHO very harshly against Tigers. Mr Hughes is also one to voice his opinion too much, but that is another story. The "deliberate knock-on" is a pet peeve of mine anyway, but when somebody throws the ball from 30 cms into your hand, you have no time to move your hand and it comes off your hand forwards in the 22, you automatically are given a yellow card, twice is red (ie Johnny May 2 years ago). This is insane for me and was one of the many reasons I stopped watching the game for a while a couple of years ago. My addiction prevailed though!

If a referee has enough experience of the game at a high enough level, then they have a better understanding of the circumstances. The flip side of this is potentially that that ex-player has allegencies, even subconcious, that play a large part in how they referee a game. Furthermore, an ex-back has probably no idea of the dark arts of the front row, for example.

There used to be an opinion in 1990s that a good referee is not noticed. I wish that were still the case!

[TigerFeetSteve]

At the top level, there needs to be some proper tear downs of games for referees. One of those where every ruck gets viewed from multiple angles, away from time pressures the game, actually review each and every jackel attempt, every clear out, understand what can and can't be deemed legal. Then look at the decisions that were made, understand if there's something being missed consistently, look at how to rectify these things or better monitor it.

How do we decide currently if a ref has a bad game, mostly on what we see from our camera angle and what the studio shows us on replays, which may well not always pick things up.

Do a full tear down look at every possible infringement that could have been given, then review action plans from there...

[Not a jock]

Perhaps the question should be posed the other way round ie has refereeing a problem with rugby (union)?

Too many rules and too complicated rules to be applied consistently by refs from different cultures, countries, experience etc.

For example, even Nige and Sir Ian can’t agree if it was, or wasn’t, a knock-on by LR-Z (for what it’s worth, I don’t think it was but was a very fluky punt as it didn’t hit the ground or another player before it hit his leg).

[wellstiger]

Let the Sirs referee the game according to the rules.
Each season we start with directives from on high about how interpretation of various rules can improve the game (invariably doesn't) only to be shelved half way into the season, and the blatantly obvious infringements are treated as an acceptable weigh off.
Yes I'm all for player safety and these checks and balances should stand.
However there are those who are too self reliant on TMO. Thereby micro manage by monitor. Oh the beauty of Barnes and Owens who state "I have seen enough , my decision stands"
The game slipped to continual off side at kick off and breakdown. No arm tackles/diving in on 5 meter line. Forward passes.
Can we please get back to "If the ball moves in a forward direction" not " The direction of the hand"

So in short they governing the refs and the refs themselves are causing a problem. The game would naturally flow better if it was refereed correctly. Else lets play Murder Ball.