Referees - Match Adjudicators, or Match "Managers"?

[Darren]

One thing I notice a lot - esp since I was gifted a pair of 'Sports Ears' (you guys are too much ) and at the Force's game against the Chiefs is how much the referee's interfere with and guide the play of the game rather than refereeing the game as it is played.

We know that the Chiefs were targeting O'Connor with high kicks and then attempting to intimidate him with a charge. On at least two occasions the runner leading the charge was in an offside position and was called back by the referee before making contact and play was allowed to continue.

Sure, Jonker may have saved O'Connor a bit of a knock and allowed the game to 'flow' by apparently not allowing an infringement to occur, but by being in an offside position and attempting to attack O'Connor in the first place they had already interfered in play - O'Connor had to keep an eye on the ball and the offside player who was about to flatten him. To his credit, O'Connor stood his ground and made the catch.

I would expect this sort of coaching by the referee in a juniors match, but surely at Super 14 level the referee's role would be to referee and not coach?

Should the referee alert a player that he is on an offside position? Should a penalty have been awarded in the above instance? Should the refs take a step back and only referee on the game as it is played? This would give the disciplined teams the benefit that good discipline should bring and penalise the undisciplined.

As an aside - did anyone else think that when advantage was applied to the Force, it lasted only a few seconds with little ground being made yet seemed to go one over multiple phases for the Chiefs?

Bloody refs ....

[BLR]

We don't want the game turning into penalty after penalty...I think Bill Harrigon said before refereeing a State of Origin a few years ago that his job is to essentially try to make sure that the game is a spectacle and he is not blowing the whistle every few minutes...

[shasta]

We don't want the game turning into penalty after penalty...I think Bill Harrigon said before refereeing a State of Origin a few years ago that his job is to essentially try to make sure that the game is a spectacle and he is not blowing the whistle every few minutes...

God forbid our referees ever get to the stage the Mungo refs are at. They never STFU. They even yell to the defense "Hold, hold....go!" It's all aimed at keeping the game flowing and the ball in play (sound familiar?) It's been counterproductive, apart from being bloody annoying. The introduction of wrestling coaches at NRL clubs is a direct result. You can now witness the defenders wrestling the player to a holding position while they look to the referee waiting for him to call "move". It's a bloody joke and "legalised" slowing down of the ruck contest.

Don't even get me started on the ridiculous scene being played out this year where we see the referees coaching the packs on how to scrum correctly.

As far as Mr Jonker and Co calling players back on side in the situation Coach referred to, I agree the offside player has already taken part in play. Penalty. Ecky?

[Flamethrower]

Don't even get me started on the ridiculous scene being played out this year where we see the referees coaching the packs on how to scrum correctly.

Or reminding them that there are Millions of people watching on TV, so make it pretty and neat

[Punkpapa]

Surprised there has been little banter here about the Brumbies having a penalty try awarded against them despite it not even remotely looking like one.
I am prepared to give Refs a fair go, as they are on the ground and even the players admit it can be hectic to keep up with it all.
But a penalty try surely in this day and age must be sent to the TMO for confirmatoin of the events that led to the decision to consider a penalty try?

[Swee_82]

PP, not having seen the Brumbies game I didn't know about the dodgey penalty try until I read about it in the Aus this morning- but if the description in there is in any way accurate, then it was defiantely questionable.

The article in question:

Ref ruins game by making up variations

Wayne Smith

THE Brumbies deserved better, the contest deserved better and the game deserved better than the nonsense dispensed by New Zealand referee Steve Walsh in Cape Town on the weekend.

Playing the in-form Stormers at Newlands in front of 45,000 fans is a tough ask at any time, let alone when the entire season is on the line, as it was for the Brumbies. The last thing they needed was for the most notorious showman in the Test refereeing ranks to decide the IRB had not gone far enough last week in its law changes and to unilaterally introduce a change of his own.

Under the IRB laws, a penalty try should only be awarded when a try would have been scored but for the illegal play of the defending side. Under the experimental law variation personally ushered in by Walsh, a penalty try can be awarded when a ball-carrier who seemingly has just put a foot into touch tosses an inaccurate pass back infield to a team-mate who is bumped by a defender while attempting to haul it in.

For the purpose of the Walsh law, it helps if the team-mate attempting to catch the ball theatrically throws his hands in the air to signal his disappointment when the ball goes to ground. Nonetheless the key element of this law variation is that the referee should proceed immediately to the goalposts, ignoring protestations of the three other defenders in the immediate vicinity of the non-tackle, and pose dramatically while awarding a penalty try.

Let's rewind just a fraction here. Let's assume Stormers captain Jean De Villiers didn't put a foot into touch before throwing infield to Gcobani Bobo. That still leaves the fact that a Brumbies defender, five-eighth Christian Lealiifano is still so close to Bobo that the two of them are bumping shoulders as they run side by side. Had Lealiifano not "tackled" Bobo early, and curiously the Stormers centre stayed on his feet throughout this entire episode, then the moment he received the pass, he would have been tackled. The tryline was still a dozen or so metres away, so there is no way he could have dived, crawled or aquaplaned for the try.

By definition then -- or rather, the IRB's definition, not the one Walsh made up on the run -- it was anything but certain the try would have been scored. On the strength of probability, the tackle would have been completed and with no other Stormers in sight and three other Brumbies in close proximity, chances are Bobo would have been isolated and the Brumbies would have been awarded a free-kick.

Not only did Walsh award a penalty try, he sent Lealiifano to the sin bin for 10 minutes, during which time the Stormers took full advantage of their extra man to establish good field position from which they extracted another three points from a penalty goal.

Now fast forward to the 53rd minute. This time it is the Brumbies on full assault. They construct a one-man, possibly two-man overlap on the right, but as the final pass is delivered, Bobo again throws his hand around. But this time, in the considered opinion of the assistant referee standing just metres away, he deliberately knocks the ball down.

Had it not been for his illegal play, in the opinion of South African commentators and journalists, the pass would have been completed and the Brumbies would have scored.

Walsh confers with the assistant referee, is told that Bobo's actions were deliberate, but then imposes no punishment beyond penalising the Stormers.

No penalty try this time for the Brumbies, no yellow card for Bobo. The Stormers win 20-10 to move into the top four, the Brumbies' dramatic drive to the play-offs stalls.

They are now seven points out of the top four with only two rounds to go and, realistically, there is no coming back from that predicament, no matter what the mathematicians might calculate.

Walsh isn't to blame for the hole the Brumbies find themselves in. Had he even-handedly awarded a penalty try to both teams or none at all, it's still highly possible the Stormers would have won. But he is a highly experienced referee. That's why he was appointed to a match of this significance in the first place. He is one of the best and better was expected of him.

So now the Brumbies are out of the race. Ditto for Western Force despite its last-gasp win over the Chiefs on Friday night. And with the Reds long ago having dropped off the pace, the Waratahs are Australia's only remaining hope.

It can't honestly be said that they inspire a lot of hope. They started manfully against the Bulls, scored an early try through youngster Rob Horne and should have added another soon after but for a brilliant piece of Bulls defence to knock the ball out of Luke Burgess' hands as he was diving over the line.

But the longer the match went, the less in control the Waratahs looked.

But if they don't dramatically improve on this performance against the Stormers and Reds, they are going to be left high and dry again.

[shasta]

PP, not having seen the Brumbies game I didn't know about the dodgey penalty try until I read about it in the Aus this morning- but if the description in there is in any way accurate, then it was defiantely questionable.

Wow that really sounds BAD. Maybe it's time for a re-think on the application of video to decision making in Pro Rugby. Nobody wants the video ref to be called on needlessly but in light of incidents like this maybe ALL tries can be reviewed. It's not necessary to wait for a decision. It could be done while the conversion attempt is being made. In the event of a "no-try" the lost time could be added to the clock and play resumes. Or the time could be kept separate on a "shot clock" All penalty try decisions, at least, should be reviewed.

Marius Jonker was correct in his reasoning with the Shep knock on the other night. He just got the wording of his question wrong. The IRB should take the need for clever phrasing out of the equation.

[Darren]

Marius Jonker was correct in his reasoning with the Shep knock on the other night. He just got the wording of his question wrong. The IRB should take the need for clever phrasing out of the equation.

Agree with this, however I think Jonker explaining to the TMO that a penalty would be awarded should a try not be awarded was a bit leading also - it wasn't a piece of information that was not required to make a decision on the possibility of a knock on and could conceivably have led the TMO to err on the side of caution against awarding the try knowing that they'd get another shot for points to win

[Punkpapa]

Marius is NOT my favourite ref - in fact, as far as refs, go, he is quite unusual in his rulings, in particular the scrum. I used to rate Walsh, but after that, I am asking the question of him? Walsh is notoriously "matey" with the players, much in the same vein as one former Mungo ref come Gladiators umpire.
The danger is that rugby was the one code where Refs are rightly called Sir, the players are called by their numbers or position, and any questions to the ref are directed through the captain. Seeing bad decisions, such as a penalty try being given without consultation, could lead to this established, gentleman like standard being abadoned.
The mungo refer nearly everything to the TMO these days, which I don't want to see happen in Ra Ra. But on anything that could be remotely considered controversial, it only makes sense. Imagine if the EWF had been awarded the try by Shep without TMO consultation - although we would be delighted, the Chiefs would have been right to be annoyed. It would not have changed the result, but it would have meant EWF would have received the bonus point, which could "mathematically" become vital over the next two weeks.

[BLR]

The Brumbies player pushed the Stormers player in the game....I don't see the big problem with the penalty try...don't push the opposing player when he has a potential scoring opportunity...it looks kinda soft but it doesn't change the fact that he pushed the Stormers player out of the way...

[rick boyd]

The sort of approach The Coach is advocating has already been tried. For years UK refs were notorious for prescriptively applying the laws for infringements, even those that had no affect on the game whatsoever. Result? An endless succession of penalty kicks while the teams stood around doing nothing and the spectators looked at interesting cloud formations.

The modern refereeing approach is the right approach. The referees are not there to dish out penalties. They are there to facilitate the playing of the game and as such should maintain a dialogue with players so they know what they're doing wrong and can correct it as they play.

At this point, some pom usually says "it's not the referees job to educate players. If the players can't play according to the laws then a few penalties will quickly smarten them up".

Except that has never worked and never will work. Players bend the rules as much as they can, because if they don't the opposition will, and that will gain them an advantage. And also refereeing interpretations vary from ref to ref and even from game to game.

Besides, most of the infringements come from forwards, and they're all too stupid to remember all the laws at one time... :-)

[shasta]

The Brumbies player pushed the Stormers player in the game....

Nobody's really questioning that. But a video review could have shown that De Villiers was in touch. Line out..throw to ACT.

[Darren]

The sort of approach The Coach is advocating has already been tried.

Not so much advocating as questioning - with a particular example. I tend to agree with yourself, BLR and others and don't want to see a penalty kick fest anymore than anyone else - I just thought they were pushing the boundaries a little far and a little often to the point where they were genuinely interfering in play. I do however reserve the right to change my mind on this upon viewing a replay

[BLR]

Nobody's really questioning that. But a video review could have shown that De Villiers was in touch. Line out..throw to ACT.

I had to watch the replay and slow it down to see that he went out, if the 'Assistant Referee' couldn't see in in real time what do you expect the Match Referee do? TMO at every possibly opportunity? And this happened in the 20th minute, why couldn't the Brumbies simply played a good game to win it, looks like they are suffering from sour grapes at the moment.

The ref used his own judgement to make a call as despite the passing player being out of play from the information he got from his assistant referee (not mentioning the passign player was out)I think he made the right decision, it's nothing in the region of awarding tries despite there being no evidence what-so-ever of the grounding of the ball...

[Darren]

ON another similar topic, I had THIS (PowerPoint, Approx 4mb) presentation come across my desk a little while back and would be interested in others views. Video clips mentioned are not actually included...