Criticism of referees in the AP

For me, an unlikely critic of referees at the weekend was Conor O'Shea following Quins' win at London Welsh. To precis, he basically said that everything about the referee's performance was bad.

This comes hard on the heels of Richard Cockerill's criticism of the refereeing of the scrum during Tigers' game against Gloucester last weekend.

Cockers has been dubbed 'Sir Alex' (as in Ferguson) for intimidating refs - and Tigers were awarded two scrum penalty tries against Worcester on Friday night. I didn't see the game, but friends who did said both penalty tries were justified, so fair enough.

That's not the point though.

Most clubs put their issues about refereeing decisions in through the post game review process to the RFU. While this is the norm, there is a worrying trend for
DORs/head coaches to criticise refs in public via whatever media will listen to them.

The referees have no such recourse to explain their decisions and refute the criticism.

However, even if a referee has made some mistakes you can bet they are 1/20 of the mistakes made by the players in any given match. John Mitchell aside , the DORs/coaches would be having those discussions with their players in private.

Can our referees please be afforded the same courtesy.

I hope the trend stops as you say.

However, COS clearly was unusually incensed at the performance of the 'part time' official & it may be (purely supposition) having seen Cockers criticism the week before & the complete reverse trend in decision making of the officials at scrum time this last game he (COS) may have seen the benefit of the overt criticism.

COS for his part explained that he has always gone down the official route of assessing the officials performance but after last week to no avail. I suspect it also helped his cause that Quins hadn't lost the game either.

We all want the best quality refereeing but I don't like the trend towards criticising the officials overtly post match, players requesting yellow cards etc.

It's not football & rugby should have better standards.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/9786503/Rugby-Union-in-revolt-what-do-the-experts-think.html

An article on the subject today.

There are far too many comments on the referees, realistically a penalty could be given at almost every ruck or scrum. Each individual ref must then decide what is worthy of blowing up for and when its better to let the game flow. This means there is a lack of continuity. Its hard to see how it could be changed though, unless all refs worldwide said they would actually play to the letter of the law. There would be a few months of constant penalties, but maybe it would have the desired effect.

Its all very well saying that grievencies should be taken offline with the RFU, but what if the RFU aren't listening?

I'm all for Cocker's and O'Shea's comments personally. Its about time something was done about refereeing inconsistencies. And don't even get me started on the scrum, the vast majority of officials are clueless and deserve both barrels.

Biggest myth in rugby is that we respect the referee.

red_stag wrote:Biggest myth in rugby is that we respect the referee.

+1

Respect is earnt.

Coaches probably shouldnt be coming out like this, but if the standard of refereeing is consistently not good enough and the offical route is garnering no rewards what choice do they have? We always say that winning is paramount in rugby, those guys jobs depend on their teams winning.

I watched a lot of rugby over the weekend, and the standard of refereeing was poor across the board. I dont think the referee changed the outcome of a game (ie the stronger team not winning) but it still wasnt good enough.

Comfort wrote:Respect is earnt.

Simple so. Coaches who dare to speak out have their team docked league points. A straight red for any player talking back to referee. That won't be long earning peoples respect

haha I was thinking more along the lines of Nigel Owens as an example, hes earned the respect of all rugby folk as a referee.

You're probably right though

The reason Nigel Owens is liked is that he is personable. It is nothing to do with his actual refereeing ability (talented referee that he is).

His coming out as gay, his television show in Wales, his "this is not soccer" are all the type of thing that has him popular and dare I say in Ireland he is popular as he refereed key games during the time that Munster and Leinster won the games.

If people wanted to they could pick accurately holes in his game same as any other ref.

As a referee, isnt it part of your role though? Being personable and good at communicating? Considering hes dealing with a group of 30 testosterone filled men and their buds as a job.

Be a good referee (in general), be sensible in dealing with the players and sympathetic with coaches and you wont get lambasted in the press.

My real problem at the moment is the TMO's being used in the AP, by jheeeeez i dont think I've seen one of them make a call I agree with yet!

So is all refs coming out as gay the answer?

Some refs have a wonderfeel feel for the game - others don't. There is a lot at stake in professional sport and we should demand the highest standards from officials. That said, it is the law makers responsibility to ensure that the laws that govern the game are clear and open to as little interpretaion as possible. Rugby will always need some "interpretation" but every breakdown and scrum collapse should not be decided by the referees whim.

I think referees have been let down by the law makers who have made an already difficult job almost impossible

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:So is all refs coming out as gay the answer?

Well it worked for Nige?!

Agree with Offload, its not just the decisions in the games, its the citings and inconsistencies, the constant rule changes trialled by different hemispheres etc.

I dont envy referees, and its rare a referee alone will decide the outcome of a game but I think the standard in general needs improving, by whatever means.

The standard in general definitely need improving. The system I suppose is the more accurate way.

You never have a situatin where suddenly all the refs are useless. There will always be good ones and bad ones. Same with players and coaches.

Difference is that it seems the system handicaps the refs. I can certainly understand why Cockers and O'Shea are upset but the finger is pointing at wrong people.

The Jeff coaches should take a look at the standard of reffing in the Rabo before criticising! Anyone watching the Edinburgh vs Leinster game at the weekend can be rightly baffled at almost every key decision, and certainly every scrum.

funnyExiledScot wrote:The Jeff coaches should take a look at the standard of reffing in the Rabo before criticising! Anyone watching the Edinburgh vs Leinster game at the weekend can be rightly baffled at almost every key decision, and certainly every scrum.

Hear, hear. The refs in the RABO are a total joke.

It doesn't really help the refs that scrums are such a mess, just get it in and out, we want to watch rugby not endless scrum resets.

It's an interesting issue. I agree with Ed Morrison (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/07/conor-oshea-harlequins-disrepute-charge) in that this criticism is probably off-putting to potential refs, isn't in the spirit of the game (Red Stag, it may be that referees aren't respected at the top level but when I played at school we always called the referee Sir and any chat back would see us marching back 10 and even playing under one particular referee who isn't just awful but demonstrably biased at Uni we maintain courtesy and use the proper methods of feedback- they don't work as he still referees our matches despite being an ex-club captain of our rivals and actually gloating over them winning over us in a match he refereed last year, which is just Frak terrible) and specifically targeting referees by name isn't constructive, unless they are so bad that specific work must be done or they should stop refereeing. It was out of character for Connor to speak in this way so he must have been very upset. We have a dearth of referees in rugby which is why some are going to be part-time, and the scrum needs sorting beyond merely saying it is the referee's fault. Refereeing rugby is very difficult given the complexity of laws involved and how hard it is to see what is happening in a pile of bodies.

However, just because it is difficult doesn't mean that we should tolerate poor or lazy refereeing. Medicine is difficult but if your doctor made a mistake that caused you significant harm or was blatantly incompetent you should be allowed to complain about them. Aside form the case I spoke about above, I know little about the rugby referee feedback system, but all remote (whether anonymous) feedback systems I have encountered have been flawed in that a person can easily refuse to accept the criticism being given and 3rd parties will often not act until there is a large amount of negative feedback or not at all. All buerocratical institutions are adverse to change for some reason. Naming and shaming, whilst harsh, can be far more effective and better in the long term for the referee shamed. You say the finger is being pointed at the wrong people, Stag, but I disagree (though blame goes to these people as well)- if there are good and bad referees, the finger needs to be pointed at the bad referees as that implies that they can be good enough if they try. The problem with Cockers and COS is that they need to let these individuals know HOW to referee better, more constructive criticism

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/9783925/Referees-must-police-elite-scrums-for-rugbys-sake.html

Can we let Moore and Cotton have free reign to sort this out? What happened to Moore's refereeing?

ChequeredJersey wrote:What happened to Moore's refereeing?

Publicity stunt. He has not even refereed a full game of amatuer rugby. Refereed a few minutes of a match.

Thanks for the feedback on this. Perhaps the DORs and all concerned need to focus more on the effectiveness, or lack of, the review process.

Most large organisations have regular performance review procedures. If carried out properly these are supposed to effect an improvement in performance by measuring performance against agreed targets/objectives. They are not about scapegoating.

A good manager will be able to suggest positive steps that an individual needs to take to get to the required level.

This is the area that Ed Morrison needs to address; the effectiveness and robustness of the review procedure.

I think the refereeing is remarkably good given the complexities of the game - there are something like 17 different potential offences at a lineout for example and coaches whinging about refs publicly - despicable and should get them banned.

There are several different aspects to reffing errors.
1) offences not seen
A ref has to p[olice a number of differnt locations at the same time. How can he watch for ruck offence and offside in the backs at the same time for example. He cannot and will miss things as a result. the only solution is more officials on the field and / or more use of TV replay

2) inconsistencises between refs
As much of it is down to interpretation then this will always happen. I know that a lot of work is done to try to even this out but we as fans bemoan refs who are too "rulebook" and if a ref actually blew for every offense a game would be awful to watch as it would stop every few seconds

3) Inconsistencies during a game. againthis is down to interpretation a lot of the time

I think the only way to sort this out is to use more officials at the top level so less is missed and to simplyfy the game abit. for example at a lineout - no moving until the ball is in the air. Makes offenses much easier to see

the final think I would do is have long retrospective bans for cheating by players - such as Neil Back knocking the ball out of Stringers hand and other similar instances. if the players didn't try to cheat then the refs job would be easier. To often players are praised for cheating. Instead they should be banned for months at a time. it would soon stop

As far as I can tell all O'Shay said was that he was out of his depth and a semi-pro ref should not be referee at the highest domestic level. That is of course a matter of opinion.

I will say that at work we have a whistleblower policy. You have specific channels you should go through to raise concerns and if the concerns aren't acted on you can go to the media. It sounds like this is what has happened with O'Shay.

Having a blanket protection of referees with no criticism being air ever isn't going to help matters. What would help is some clarification of the processes behind the game and assessment of refs.

Its the public airing that is wrong

TJ/Hammer.

Good points. I have noticed recently that assistant refs now seem to be flagging more offences. This is an improvment - as TJ said, the ref can't see everything.

It would also be good if the various unions/leagues published how they rate referees. Given that the laws of the game are supposed to be universal, it would be nice to hear some comments from the IRB on this.

Half the Laws need to be scrapped to give officials a chance. Start with the stupid back foot law.

I do think that in the main, the rugby world does respect its referees.

What however does happen that referees are appointed to games (whether it be International,Province or club) which are beyond their abilities, and the ensueing pressure then placed on those refs causes them to err in their decision making and ability to progress the players through the game.

Most disrespect arises from referees making poor decisions and waving brightly coloured cards about- it doesnt help when they are being assisssted by totally inept linesmen, and its those incidents that get all the publicity, the result being that the efforts of many hard working referees acting with the best interests of the game at heart goes unnoticed.

TJ wrote:Its the public airing that is wrong

It depends. If you've gone through the proper channels several times and are satisfied that steps are being taken for improvements I'd say you have to go public with it. That's why most systems have whistleblower policies. I'm not talking about Cockerill (although we don't know what he had done officially before complaining) but O'Shay who does tend to complain at the referee. He's usually careful to include that they need to play the ref's interpretation (making it clear the ref had a different interpretation of course).

TJ wrote:I think the refereeing is remarkably good given the complexities of the game - there are something like 17 different potential offences at a lineout for example and coaches whinging about refs publicly - despicable and should get them banned.There are several different aspects to reffing errors.
1) offences not seen
A ref has to p[olice a number of differnt locations at the same time. How can he watch for ruck offence and offside in the backs at the same time for example. He cannot and will miss things as a result. the only solution is more officials on the field and / or more use of TV replay

2) inconsistencises between refs
As much of it is down to interpretation then this will always happen. I know that a lot of work is done to try to even this out but we as fans bemoan refs who are too "rulebook" and if a ref actually blew for every offense a game would be awful to watch as it would stop every few seconds

3) Inconsistencies during a game. againthis is down to interpretation a lot of the time

I think the only way to sort this out is to use more officials at the top level so less is missed and to simplyfy the game abit. for example at a lineout - no moving until the ball is in the air. Makes offenses much easier to see

the final think I would do is have long retrospective bans for cheating by players - such as Neil Back knocking the ball out of Stringers hand and other similar instances. if the players didn't try to cheat then the refs job would be easier. To often players are praised for cheating. Instead they should be banned for months at a time. it would soon stop

Don't be so bloody melodramatic.

Its not melodramatic.

When coaches publicly critise referees they undermne thir authority and they create an atmosphere in which public critisim of refs becomes acceptable.

This makes the individual refs job harder and also makes it harder to attract people into refereeing.

Its also very unfair as the refs cannot reply in any way.

There are ways to provide feedback on a refs performance and refs have continuous assessment and review.

Coaches that complain PUBLICLY about refs damage the game badly and should be held to account for this.

Being held to account by banning them (although i'm not sure how you'd 'ban' a coach anyway) would be a big over reaction. Just like your suggestion.

If indeed it even is worthy of sanction, which it isn't, then that sanction should probably be a reprimand in the first instance, and a fine of some description in a further instance.

Just because rugby coaches rarely speak publicly about issues surrounding the game, it doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done.

TJ wrote:Its not melodramatic.

When coaches publicly critise referees they undermne thir authority and they create an atmosphere in which public critisim of refs becomes acceptable.

This makes the individual refs job harder and also makes it harder to attract people into refereeing.

Its also very unfair as the refs cannot reply in any way.

There are ways to provide feedback on a refs performance and refs have continuous assessment and review.

Coaches that complain PUBLICLY about refs damage the game badly and should be held to account for this.

+ 1

I was at the Lon Welsh v Quins game.
The referee was a joke, I was sitting next to an exiles suporter and he agreed on all counts.

Game management was awful, he took ages to re-start every set piece.
We got the impression that the ref's fitness may have been in doubt and was slowing the game to recover!
Back foot wasnt policed at all (admittedly that falls to the touch judges too). Illegally slowing the ball, tacklers not releasing etc.

DOR's mouthing off about ref's never looks good in the press - But I agree that COS had to say something in this case. I can only imagine what Venter might have said about it!

HammerofThunor wrote:a semi-pro ref should not be referee at the highest domestic level. That is of course a matter of opinion.

Thats a peculiar one though. In some countries such as Ireland they are all semi pro.

Allain Rolland is a mortgage broker. Alan Lewis is involved in insurance. George Clancy is a civil servant for the county council. John Lacey is a community development officer, Peter Fitzgibbon works in leisure management.

They all fit refereeing around their day job and are better than some professional referees. Look at Scotland - they have full time referees and honestly aren't fit for a Rabo bottom of the table clash.

We had a part time referee officiating at the Rugby World Cup Final in 2007.

Shouldnt this thread be in the Club section?

propdavid_london wrote:Shouldnt this thread be in the Club section?

It should be in a section labelled 'Non Event'.

This has provided a golden opportunity for some individuals with an axe to grind to have a dig at two successful DOR who they are probably insanely jealous of.

propdavid_london wrote:Shouldnt this thread be in the Club section?

Yes it should be. I was on the Club section when I posted the article, so I have no idea why it is in the International section.

Mods?

red_stag wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:a semi-pro ref should not be referee at the highest domestic level. That is of course a matter of opinion.

Thats a peculiar one though. In some countries such as Ireland they are all semi pro.

Allain Rolland is a mortgage broker. Alan Lewis is involved in insurance. George Clancy is a civil servant for the county council. John Lacey is a community development officer, Peter Fitzgibbon works in leisure management.

They all fit refereeing around their day job and are better than some professional referees. Look at Scotland - they have full time referees and honestly aren't fit for a Rabo bottom of the table clash.

We had a part time referee officiating at the Rugby World Cup Final in 2007.

Clearly the English system doesn't train refs well enough for them to be any good semi-pro. It is of course a matter of competancy rather than anything else. There are plenty of slightly lower level comps they could be involved in (LV, HEC, etc) before they're brought into the Premiership games

http://www.espnscrum.com/premiership-2012-13/rugby/story/175553.html

With Cockers it was the straw that broke the camals back. He's been saying for years that reffing isn't consistent, particularly at the scrum and has called for the organisational bodies to sort it out. Against Glaws the was a yc after the fourth scrum penalty then another six were conceded with warnings but no card (including three inside the Glaws 22). Incidentally the yc given at the scrum was on halfway.

Cockers bemoaned the inconsistency buy said it was up to the head of referees and Rob Andrew to get together and provide the refs with the tools to make the correct decisions.

O'Shea's comments were closer to verbal assault but I haven't seen the game so I don't know if they were justified.

It does appear with Cockerill though that he is trying to directly influence referees ( albeit to get it "right") through the media ...force them to make strong decisions on the scrum near the try line etc.
He may well have a fair point, (why is a maul 10m out a penalty try but not a scrum on the try line collapsed 4 times?) but he is in danger of becoming rugbys Alex Ferguson.
It also seems to be a weekly event that refs are criticised now, sometimes a bit more subtly but coaches almost seem to deem it their duty to bitch about things.

I would though like to see the authorities across the board do more to train and support referees, and open up more discussions on what is fair and consistent use of the laws and their powers. It does happen, but not enough it seems.

It's all deflection.

Three things should happen NOW if the soccer comparisons are not to continue:

1 the RFU should tell coaches to button it or face sanctions
2 refs should meet with the coaches every so often so issues can be raised in private
3 the IRB must look at ditching half the law book. Being right as a ref in a superhuman task, that can't be right.

I do think it is a bit stupid of coaches to come out and complain, after all if you say the ref pinged us all the time in the ruck, video can and will show that there was a legitaimate penality, or complaining about this and that, will show that thier players doing exactly the same in the game.
Example being cockers winge about scrums before the wuss game, two penality trys given to him when the second one was clearly wrong as the tigers had pushed wuss back about 3mtrs before the ball had been put in.

two penality trys given to him when the second one was clearly wrong as the tigers had pushed wuss back about 3mtrs before the ball had been put in.

Why was the put in delayed? Might have been something to do with the Wuss tightheads arm being in the floor blocking the ball in. That last scrum was a mess for so many reasons and should of have been reset. Interesting to see Flats representing the front row union on ESPN agreeing with Cockerill. Far more penalties at the scrum are tolerated without sanction than are allowed at the breakdown.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

two penality trys given to him when the second one was clearly wrong as the tigers had pushed wuss back about 3mtrs before the ball had been put in.

Why was the put in delayed? Might have been something to do with the Wuss tightheads arm being in the floor blocking the ball in. That last scrum was a mess for so many reasons and should of have been reset. Interesting to see Flats representing the front row union on ESPN agreeing with Cockerill. Far more penalties at the scrum are tolerated without sanction than are allowed at the breakdown.

What by the second rows feet?

think they need to go back to the old front rows in, second rows in, back rows in, BALL IN!! none of this hit malarky that has arms dropped by binding on the arms, early engage, early push and make the number 2 do his position(at work and blocks anything with that position written down )

I agree Knees.
The sides that have built and paid a lot of money to put together destructive sides whilst getting no assistance from incompetent refs are wasting their time. If the refs are incompetent in the area, then the little dears need simple laws to work on.

Already the IRB sanctions forward passes affected by momentum contrary to the laws and squint feeds affected by the non-existent 'hit'.

Red Stag said earlier that referees would earn respect if players apart from the skipper kept their gobs shut by penalising the crerpe out of them. It wouldnn't of course, they'd only earn compliance like kids in the care of dodgy teachers or clerics.

I'd like more openness in referees reports and full professionalism at the elite level so that interpretations can be explained, distributed through the clubs and countries, and feedback to the referees' panels.

Plus akin to cricket and tennis, touchline challenges. Plus reducing game time to 40 minutes of open play (outside set-pieces) might be helpful to give fee-paying punters more for their money and to minimise time-wasting, clock-running etc. YCs could be reduced to 5 minutes.

Mind you a root and branch drains-up of the Laws might be helpful to simplify the game whilst retaining its essential characteristics. It appears that nobody really understands the game any more as in the past the IRB Law-makers have fiddled and faddled with symptoms whilst leaving underlying malaises untreated.