Football pundits v rugby pundits

[northerntiger]

I’ve got very mixed feeling on this. I like the fact that the ref is not questioned in rugby.
But
I get a little frustrated that really questionable calls are never debated by the pundits at half time or after the game. Particularly today. What do people think?

[BigDan50]

Because the ref is right even when he’s wrong, sets us apart from football.

[Crofty]

Generally I think it's good that in rugby the referees are respected, especially by the players but I fear it goes too far into the territory of near feudal deference sometimes as very few are willing to call out howlers, oddly especially if it is a series of howlers...

[northerntiger]

I agree, but we now have a TMO. Is he right, even when wrong

[Big Dai]

Because the ref is right even when he’s wrong, sets us apart from football.

VAR? Put those lines on Dograt...... He was offside!

[Offside]

It comes from the tradition of the game. We now have professional referees at premiership level and it could be argued that they are fair game for criticism but if we do start questioning after a decision then it will permeate done the levels. The decision will not be turned over anyway. In football even a ref for a kids Saturday morning games gets paid £10. Rugby refereeing is on expenses only up to quite a high level. I can see some refs saying it is not worth the abuse if the approach in rugby changes.

[RichieB]

A lot of posts on here are critical of the rugby pundits - sometimes with justification. However,I give you a brief synopsis of the insightful comments offered by the BBC football pundits this evening....

Question - “What did you make of that goal?”
Answer - ‘It was unbelievable’

Q - “What about that save from Schmeichal?”
A - ‘It was unbelievable’

Q - “Wasn’t it great to have the fans in the stadium to watch this?”
A - ‘It was unbelievable’

Etc

[wellstiger]

Unbelievable........

[Tigers86asw]

I don’t think that questioning the ref like football is good for the game but a debate about the role of the TMO and the endless intervention should be done.

[kk20gb30]

Different games,different cultures and traditions....................

[sk 88]

If not criticising the officials extended to not pillorying the players for their penalty counts I could accept it. But too often players are criticised for giving away penalties when the referee misses it 4 or 5 times out of ten. When you add on the perhaps 1 in 10 that are errors that is a lot of penalties where "you've seen them let go".

What football has is balance, "this is what the referee's thinking, this is the other way he might have seen it".
Rugby the commentary, whatever happens, is "the referee 100% right, no alternative explination is possible, the player is a cynical cheat and WHERE ARE THE YELLOW CARDS?????".

It annoys me, the hectoring tone is so off putting. Especially when the TMO proves conclusively they DO miss so much and make so many errors.

[LE18]

If not criticising the officials extended to not pillorying the players for their penalty counts I could accept it. But too often players are criticised for giving away penalties when the referee misses it 4 or 5 times out of ten. When you add on the perhaps 1 in 10 that are errors that is a lot of penalties where "you've seen them let go".

What football has is balance, "this is what the referee's thinking, this is the other way he might have seen it".
Rugby the commentary, whatever happens, is "the referee 100% right, no alternative explination is possible, the player is a cynical cheat and WHERE ARE THE YELLOW CARDS?????".

It annoys me, the hectoring tone is so off putting. Especially when the TMO proves conclusively they DO miss so much and make so many errors.

ooh SK88 that's a bit of a statement. Rugby is so much more a technical game and getting every decision correct is almost impossible in such a closed game on the ground and in normal mauling and rucking, unlike football which is open and can be clearly seen by the ref. Rugby players don't surround the refs, pushing them, verbally abusing them, they respect the decisions. I cant believe the holding and wrestling that goes on in football, especially in the penalty box and the play acting that goes on with injured players, it's unbelievable, if they are so hurt why are they still on the pitch?

[Tigers86asw]

The quality of punditry in rugby is quite poor in that there is little variety and depth. The weekly coverage of the premiership on the BBC involves Care, Ashton abs Monye- seriously? It’s terrible. The other podcasts that cover the Prem are so conversational. If you are a tigers fan and want a weekly discussion by experts about the premiership what do you have? Not much. Nothing like the quality you get with football. Written media...The Times have Barnes and Jones as their main contributors; it’s not 1997!

Not saying some TV pundits don’t talk sense. Kay and Lol are good, Healey’s technical analysis can be very good but he is so irritating. Would like to see more of Warburton who is very good. Best pundit is Johnno during the six nations. Monye - oh dear. Ojo was quite good on Friday. They have been scraping the barrel with the number of games and used some terrible pundits. I don’t ever get the impression many are impartial.

None of them really challenge the systems used or the TMO. The current situation in games is so poor for fans. In all sports they appear to be the loses with video assistance draining the experience for all.

[sk 88]

If not criticising the officials extended to not pillorying the players for their penalty counts I could accept it. But too often players are criticised for giving away penalties when the referee misses it 4 or 5 times out of ten. When you add on the perhaps 1 in 10 that are errors that is a lot of penalties where "you've seen them let go".

What football has is balance, "this is what the referee's thinking, this is the other way he might have seen it".
Rugby the commentary, whatever happens, is "the referee 100% right, no alternative explination is possible, the player is a cynical cheat and WHERE ARE THE YELLOW CARDS?????".

It annoys me, the hectoring tone is so off putting. Especially when the TMO proves conclusively they DO miss so much and make so many errors.

ooh SK88 that's a bit of a statement. Rugby is so much more a technical game and getting every decision correct is almost impossible in such a closed game on the ground and in normal mauling and rucking, unlike football which is open and can be clearly seen by the ref. Rugby players don't surround the refs, pushing them, verbally abusing them, they respect the decisions. I cant believe the holding and wrestling that goes on in football, especially in the penalty box and the play acting that goes on with injured players, it's unbelievable, if they are so hurt why are they still on the pitch?

I mean that was really on show on Friday night when Ben Spencer didn't agree with a short advantage and badgered Dickson into reversing it.

Rugby doesn't respect its referees. The TMO process is pretty much deliberately designed to undermine them and encourage players to whinge at them. And it does.

I'd agree with your initial statement, that the concept of "correct" is close to impossible in rugby. But that reinforces my prior point. The coverage from the TV does not reflect that players and referees are both trying their best, with good intentions, and occasionally opinions will differ because the sport is designed that way.

Take the Cole yellow card. In my, and it would appear Dan's, opinion he was on the ball and the Quins player behind him forced him to ground. The referee's view differed and once it differed the Pen Try and YC were inevitable under the laws. Did the coverage give any light to that? No, it claimed it was a cynical no debate pen try. There can be a debate without it being a mistake.

One area where the coverage is in a realistic place is head contacts. There is little you can do sometimes. How Genge avoids his card for instance, the Tom Dunn red from last week was to me crazy.

[ourla]

I’ve got very mixed feeling on this. I like the fact that the ref is not questioned in rugby.
But
I get a little frustrated that really questionable calls are never debated by the pundits at half time or after the game. Particularly today. What do people think?

As someone who has watched both sports live and on TV extensively over a long period of time IMO the difference between the two sports are more nuanced than many portray.

Did they discuss the incidents in the England v Wales game extensively both at HT and full time. I think so.

If you watch say MotD v C5 highlights, there are discussion about decisions.

When I've watched Tigers live you hear fans all the time calling out supposed wrong decisions in real time. Just like they do in football.

And these days whilst still not where it should be football players don't go after the referee like they did a few years ago. Where as in rugby the calling/gesticulating for decisions has increased.

On pundits in general, if you go on football forums, the pundits and indeed the officials, get the same pounding as they do on rugby forums. Fundamentally humans are all the same and like a good moan.