Has Rugby Got a Refereeing Problem?

[BrightonTiger]

I agree keep it simple.....

1. Tmo looks when a try is scored or player injured.

2. Feed at scrum 90 degrees

3. Touch judge where the ball goes out and offside.

4. 5 seconds from "use it". 1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi......

5. Palms must be showing when you enter a ruck.

6. Each team has 2 challenges where the ref and Touch judges watch around a little tv at the side.

[Not a jock]

MCC is spot on. There are so many posters on here wearing Tigers tinted glasses who complain about any and every decision given against us, however minor and inconsequential they may be.
I often wonder how they can take in the game and be on the keyboard so much at the same time. Maybe therein lies the answer. They can’t properly take in the game!

Were you on a keyboard during Wales v England on Saturday?

Only during breaks in play

That'll be before every scrum, line-out and kick at goal. Plenty of time for the journos to prepare their draft copy, perhaps even write a book.

[BFG]

I was pleased to see that the referee has admitted getting the first two tries wrong and Nigel Owens's affirmation of them. But let's not let the arrogant little off with a late apology. He was dismissive and rude to the England captain when waving away his more than polite enquiry.

He shouldn't be involved in a 6N match again in my opinion.
It was a harsh penalty anyway as the tackled Welsh player twists to perform squeezeball on the opposite side to where Farrell is then trapped trying to roll away.
The ref called the mark, and then allows Biggar to take the kick straight out of hand at least one metre away from the mark.
It was a farce.

[JP14]

https://www.rugbyworld.com/news/pascal- ... gby-121427

It appears that at least the ref is open about having made a mistake IMO having acknowledged it rather than bury a head in the sand it shows he's more capable of not repeating the mistakes again going forward.

At least he's come out and acknowledged it, as far as I know Craig Joubert failed to do the same back in 2015 after the World Cup quarterfinal shocker.

[ourla]

It all went pear shaped when the game went professional.

It all went pear shaped... for you

What used to be a game for all sizes is now the domain of the ripped body built Adonis. Juggernauts of the athletic world in furious collision on green carpets,rather than a few fat boys ploughing through the mud.

You make the old style game sound so attractive

Everything's changed to get a free flowing game for the spectator.

How every odd

Is that the free flowing game where Tigers scored 3 points on the weekend and battered Wasps through forward domination the week before

[ourla]

So much time setting scrums is ridiculous. We simply engaged with the other side of the scrum and didn't push until the pill came in.
The fact that referees do nothing about crooked feeds drives me (and others I know) up the wall.
The opposition hooker has no chance of a strike against the head when the ball is fed at 50 degrees towards the locks.
The set scrum is ruined as a contest , we may as well go the whole hog and start by stepping over the ball.
Reading the reams of pages printed and on line, this weekend discussing the state of refereeing , there is hardly a mention of feeding but it is fundamental to the game. Why aren't the players and the fans screaming for that part of the game to be policed properly?
The number of times you see a scum set, the feed goes straight to the second row and the whistle goes for a penalty to them against the other team? Ignoring the first penalty every time.

It's an interesting one. It's a good question as to why scrum set up as become so slow and painful. Can't really answer that one, other than if not it would probably be a right mess. But it didn't use to be 30 years ago, so what has changed.

I have read somewhere that a straight feed can be more dangerous for the front rowers and there would be more injuries. But not sure if this justified.

I disagree that scrums aren't contestable. Because the non-feeding side doesn't have to worry about the ball they can and sometimes do make their superiority count while the other team is trying to secure and use possession.

Why it's not an issue that more players, fans, authorities and they are not kicking up a fuss about it I'm not sure.

[Big Dai]

It all went pear shaped when the game went professional.

It all went pear shaped... for you

No, I stayed pear shaped.... Or is it now melon shaped?

What used to be a game for all sizes is now the domain of the ripped body built Adonis. Juggernauts of the athletic world in furious collision on green carpets,rather than a few fat boys ploughing through the mud.

You make the old style game sound so attractive

It was. Can't beat a bit of old up the jumper rugby in an honest tussle. Who needs backs anyway? They either kick it away, drop it or get intercepted.

Everything's changed to get a free flowing game for the spectator.

How every odd

Is that the free flowing game where Tigers scored 3 points on the weekend and battered Wasps through forward domination the week before

Yep. Rather than the game where the 3/4s live offside and pass forward for a try in the corner. All cordoned by sir and praised by the pundits.

[AViewFromLe2]

Hi all, as i wrote the original article, and started this topic, I thought should add further thoughts to it.

I think referees have the toughest job to do. For the Wales v England game, I sat with my fiancee and talked her through the laws and the decisions as they were made. It quickly became apparent how much they have to look out for, and how difficult it is to monitor, especially when you are faced with 30 blokes trying to push/bend these as much as possible to the point of breaking. Therefore in writing the article it was not in order to bash the ref, neither was it to excuse either Tigers or England losing. Both teams deserved to lose, as stated in the original piece.

The reason for writing the article was not to do with minor infractions or not spotting a hand in a ruck for example - players make errors, so do referees, these things can get missed, despite best efforts. I do not expect referees to get every call right or spot everything. What i am talking about however, is the obvious error or the howler. Or for seeing the opposite of what is actually going on, even with the help of replays. It is this, i believe which is on the rise, and not something that was prevalent in the game 10 years ago. Ian Henderson for example, in the Ireland game v Italy. That to me is a clear and obvious error, as it was clearly a try, but the officials managed to come to the complete opposite. Now this didn't have an impact on the game so didn't get talked about, but it's clearly a howler. That to me is the type of refereeing that is on the rise and occurring more frequently, and it is that kind of thing that lead me to ask the question, about does rugby have a refereeing problem.

[Cardiff Tig]

Players don't go into a football game or NFL game wondering what they can get away with and how to play the ref

Ironically there was almost the exact same scenario in football on Saturday as Wales first try. Except on this occasion the controversy was the ref disallowed Brighton's quickly taken free kick. Equally you must have missed all the controversies about hand balls, diving, VAR, etc.

I take your point, and VAR has been introduced and managed poorly without a doubt. But footballers take to the field knowing that they won't have to adapt to the referees style. If you kick someone without contacting the ball first it's a foul, and don't stray offside. That's pretty much all you need to know to play professional football.

IMO it's seriously at odds with professionalism is one ref favours the attacking side more and is incredibly harsh about rolling away. And another ref in the same competition gives more leeway for the same offence.

[Smudge]

Cardiff Tig is right. There should not be two interpretations of the laws, neither should it be down to getting on the right side of the official. I know it is difficult when there are so many potential offences. But as this thread is about refereeing,
The history of rugby, the great amateur sport, is such that there is a substantial sense of right and wrong behaviour which permeates through all facets of the game. Fights on the pitch were frequent as was shoeing and retribution. yet it has seldom if ever been carried off the field. Likewise it is seen as sour grapes to complain about unfair decisions and people that do are bad sports. That was my game, the game I played for many years. Born in the public schools, nursed in the the grammar schools and perfected in great clubs, the length and breadth of the country. Played by many professional people for the sheer love of the sport. We even exported it to the empire and beyond. A hooligan's game, played by gentlemen.
The referee was the sole judge of fact. We address him as sir and to argue with him was very bad form. Certainly it has always been unthinkable that he should favour one side or worse still, throw a game. That a referee would ever be corrupt in his officiating. But are we sure that there is no corruption now? Really sure? Unthinkable , ever? Who would have thought a club would corruptly gain an advantage over the others by spending millions "off the books"? How many times have you come away from a game shaking your head, incredulous at the outcome? Is the sport clean?
Now that huge amounts of money are being spent financing the professional game, the corrupt awarding of a penalty to one side at a time and in a position where it can affect the game is very possible. Why would any official act corruptly in such a way? Well, it's no secret that there are huge amounts of money wagered on pro games. All kinds of dark forces are at large when there is heavy betting involved in sport. The most gentlemanly sport of all, very akin to rugby is cricket, played by many of the same kind of people, and there have been numerous cases of match throwing for betting interests. To say that it cannot happen in rugby is naïve in the extreme. Besides the temptation of a large wad of cash appealing to a person's greed, there are numerous cases of blackmail and threats to family and children to make an official act corruptly. Would we ever know? How easy is it to favour one side against the other? When the interpretation of the laws are so varied. There are numerous "offences" at scrum and maul time that could be called and we have all seen them. How difficult would it be to favour one side with a host of kickable penalties and award an equal amount of un-kickable penalties to the opposition. Claiming at the end he had treated both sides the same. The more you think of it, the more opportunities you perceive. I am sure many on here will dismiss this out of hand, I would myself some years ago. I have no proof of corruption but how could I? No one is going to admit to match fixing but I have so often come away from a game and wondered if it had been fixed. It has also crossed my mind when a player does something stupid to lose a game if he was corrupt. I would love to believe that our sport is as pure , honest and decent as it always was. Maybe it is, we can only hope so but blind trust in this day and age is difficult, to put it mildly. No, I don't want to go calling anyone corrupt if the the game doesn't go my way, but neither do I believe we should take the purity of the sport at face value. As the old saying goes, "Never bet on anything that can talk"

[Scott1]

Hi all, as i wrote the original article, and started this topic, I thought should add further thoughts to it.

I think referees have the toughest job to do. For the Wales v England game, I sat with my fiancee and talked her through the laws and the decisions as they were made. It quickly became apparent how much they have to look out for, and how difficult it is to monitor, especially when you are faced with 30 blokes trying to push/bend these as much as possible to the point of breaking. Therefore in writing the article it was not in order to bash the ref, neither was it to excuse either Tigers or England losing. Both teams deserved to lose, as stated in the original piece.

The reason for writing the article was not to do with minor infractions or not spotting a hand in a ruck for example - players make errors, so do referees, these things can get missed, despite best efforts. I do not expect referees to get every call right or spot everything. What i am talking about however, is the obvious error or the howler. Or for seeing the opposite of what is actually going on, even with the help of replays. It is this, i believe which is on the rise, and not something that was prevalent in the game 10 years ago. Ian Henderson for example, in the Ireland game v Italy. That to me is a clear and obvious error, as it was clearly a try, but the officials managed to come to the complete opposite. Now this didn't have an impact on the game so didn't get talked about, but it's clearly a howler. That to me is the type of refereeing that is on the rise and occurring more frequently, and it is that kind of thing that lead me to ask the question, about does rugby have a refereeing problem.

Great post! Some of the decisions like you say are just midblowing these days

[BengalTiger]

Is the question being asked, are referees corrupt?

I hope no one is seriously suggesting that this is the case, all referees have prejudices but we must give them the benefit of the doubt and credit for mostly keeping even handedness, they are there not to annoy us fans but to enable 30 guys/ girls to play a very complicated and dangerous game.

I will not accept the suggestion that any ref is corrupt! dim, one eyed, (if not) blind, ignorant of the laws, child of an illegitimate liaison, etc etc, but never knowingly corrupt.

[ourla]

What i am talking about however, is the obvious error or the howler....That to me is the type of refereeing that is on the rise and occurring more frequently, and it is that kind of thing that lead me to ask the question, about does rugby have a refereeing problem.

I think you are wrong on a couple of counts.

#1 You've dragged the Moroni yellow into make your case and that is a very weak example. I suspect if it was not a Tigers player you would have paid little attention to it. And it was not a howler anyway. As regards the Wales tries, you need to look at them in isolation. They were mistakes but not necessarily howlers. The first one Biggar played the referee a little and got lucky with the kick. If he'd kicked it out or Ford intercepted Biggar would have looked a right prat and we'd all be laughing about it. Second one was a technicality. Happens so rarely.

#2 Is it on the rise? Have you got any evidence to back that up. We all know humans tend to focus on recent events. So has there been on proper analysis on refereeing errors taking into account of course the laws of the time. I am sure there have been controversies from time to time or "howlers" if you will. Is there any evidence they are getting more frequent? I'd be surprised if there was. Apart from the usual one-eyed moaning from fans with a vested interest most matches seem to pass without much ado.

[ourla]

I would imagine that referee's betting and financial history is subject to close scrutiny.

Of course it doesn't mean there is none whatsoever... Phil Blake got done for betting didn't he and I'm sure he's not the first. But no way is it rife and they would be dicing with their career and more if they did.

[AViewFromLe2]

What i am talking about however, is the obvious error or the howler....That to me is the type of refereeing that is on the rise and occurring more frequently, and it is that kind of thing that lead me to ask the question, about does rugby have a refereeing problem.

I think you are wrong on a couple of counts.

#1 You've dragged the Moroni yellow into make your case and that is a very weak example. I suspect if it was not a Tigers player you would have paid little attention to it. And it was not a howler anyway. As regards the Wales tries, you need to look at them in isolation. They were mistakes but not necessarily howlers. The first one Biggar played the referee a little and got lucky with the kick. If he'd kicked it out or Ford intercepted Biggar would have looked a right prat and we'd all be laughing about it. Second one was a technicality. Happens so rarely.

#2 Is it on the rise? Have you got any evidence to back that up. We all know humans tend to focus on recent events. So has there been on proper analysis on refereeing errors taking into account of course the laws of the time. I am sure there have been controversies from time to time or "howlers" if you will. Is there any evidence they are getting more frequent? I'd be surprised if there was. Apart from the usual one-eyed moaning from fans with a vested interest most matches seem to pass without much ado.

It's funny, in your rush to tell me how wrong I am, that you are so selective on what I wrote. The Moroni yellow is not a weak argument or example at all. The referee went upstairs specifically asking if there was a Bristol overlap (correct reasoning, even if it did his chest first, which you again have ignored), he then automatically registered the Bristol players out wide, but then did not take into account any of the defence present. That is not balanced, if you are to hamper a team with a man off, surely you would or should make 100% sure before making that call rather than rush it? It's a bad call, even if it does impact Tigers. You have then ignored the referee somehow missing the obvious knock-on advantage that led to that play, which is a very basic mistake from the referee.

You then bring up the Wales game, the referee has now come out and advised that the two tries were mistakes and should mot have stood. That then are mistakes, bad mistakes given the technology available to ensure the right decision could be made. You've even called them mistakes yourself, and clearly given the referee has said he was himself wrong, howlers.

On your second point, I don't take count of how many times the referee gets mentioned in their performance, neither do I watch every game of rugby played, but given how often fans of all teams bring up specific refereeing moments, it would seem to be a recurring subject. In any case, I do not specifically argue that rugby does have a problem, i do ask the question, and do feel that standards have dropped. A drop in standards is a problem for the sport, is it not? Seemingly fans of all clubs are mentioning the referees more, which in itself is a problem.