richgibson wrote:....... it was a chance for Mr Small to make it right in his in mind, by giving penalties against Leicester, which everyone could see were not penalties. Does anyone know what the penalty count was yesterday ? Clearly the referee lost his bottle.
Ah yes, a GP (and soon to be IRB) referee deliberately giving penalties that did not exist.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would seriously suggest such a thing.
I do apologise it was David Rose that was the referee at Saracens, which makes it even harder to understand Andrew Smalls decision making yesterday. I thought it was an appalling referee performance, or perhaps I am just blaming the referee incorrectly? I know we made some terrible mistakes yesterday, but it must be difficult as a team to keep yourself motivated when it appears that decisions are constantly going against us. Was the ref to blame or the team simply did not have anything to play for apart from pride or perhaps the combination of both ?
richgibson wrote:....... it was a chance for Mr Small to make it right in his in mind, by giving penalties against Leicester, which everyone could see were not penalties. Does anyone know what the penalty count was yesterday ? Clearly the referee lost his bottle.
Ah yes, a GP (and soon to be IRB) referee deliberately giving penalties that did not exist.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would seriously suggest such a thing.
Ditto. The ref just had a stinker and looked a bit out of his depth. Nothing crooked about it.
richgibson wrote:Was the ref to blame or the team simply did not have anything to play for apart from pride or perhaps the combination of both ?
A combination of both.
But just as we are "expected" to understand that the referee might be influenced by Tigers players early indiscretions so, I think, we should understand that the players might be influenced and frustrated by what might appear to them (and us) as bias of the referee.
In response to Tigerbeat - I understand it is an offence to not bind - but to adjust your bind whilst continually binding? Croft was off his feet - oh yeah right, even though both were firmly on the floor supporting his weight. And what about their diving over the top, bridging and sealing - ah of course, different thing.
I am in no way suggesting that Mr. Small was deliberately biased. But that that appearance could be taken is indicative of his immaturity as a referee. I am sure he will improve.
I am also sure that Tigers players will have better focus. And Mr. Venter will one day be able to control his emotions. The former is likely to occur sooner than the latter.
kingol22 wrote:I think your asking a bit too much there bill.
small improving - possibility
tigers focusing - definite
Venter controlling himself - Not a chance.
I wouldn't say biased, but certainly poor, it wasnt the calls that were the problem it was the inconsistency of them. He refereed the rucks with differing standards, for both them and us which led to confusion and he wasnt committed to his decisions, shortly after crofts yellow card an exact same penalty position and situation happened in saracens 22 and nothing came. The levels in performance by the referees this season, worldwide has probably damaged the games credibility as much if not more than bloodgate and what happened at bath. Its a sad time to be saying this!
Its No7 nature to never give in, give up or settle for second best.
Tigerbeat wrote:Bill, Castro changed his bind for which he was penalised. To change his bind he needed to break his initial bind, therefore having no bind at all.
I have no wish to be pedantic but does that mean he released his fingers for a nanosecond, lifted his arm away, clenched his fist, swung round 90 degrees and swung back again? Was this the offence that Small blew for when the ball was now 30 meters from the scrum? And presumably when their entire back row broke off they were still "virtually" bound just as when the ball was a meter away from the scrum it was still "virtually" not out and so Tigers could not play it.
so he was constantly pestering a member of the reffering staff. surely that is his 4 week ban unsuspended. The idea of moving the visiting coaching staff seems a bit pointless to my knowledge there has been no other incidents this season or for the past few seasons so because of one idiot it is going to change. where ever he is in the stadium he will annoy people.
I believe the less experienced ref's get influenced by the Welford Rd crowd & make sure they don't become homers by giving decisions against Tigers from the start. They are only human but the RFU must match ref's better to the importance of the game, we had one of the better ones Barnes as 4th official on Sat having to smile & watch the idiot on the pitch make a complete horlicks of it, even Goodgrief on the line was making most of the better decisions for him.
If only we could see what the ref's bosses write in their reports.
