Why are all elite referees white men?

First topic message reminder :

Is a lack of cultural and genderal diversity holding back progress?

Is refereeing the bane of every match because its all a white men's club stitch up?

Submachine wrote:Given that France, Ireland and South Africa each have two refs at the top table it is obvious that they are setting the standard for referees in the international ...

Are they though? That is my question. And do you believe it's mere coincidence that they are all white males?

I see gender and racial inquality everywhere. Thousands of years of history have shaped more important issues than who gets the big games. But asking a bunch of white men (educated guess) on a message board for the answers is going to leave you unfulfilled I'm afraid.
You're an eloquent chap. Why not drop the boys a line and ask them to publish their racial and gender staffing policies. I would be genuinely interested.
In the mean time I think this guy isn't too far off the mark.

Well no I don't agree that an all white mens stitch up clubs results in people not agreeing with refs. I think the complexity of some rules and lack of enforcing some rules leads to frustration. I would also say culturally i have much more in common with Christian Wade than I do Joubert.

The question comes from how many refs the elite panel can choose from and the reasons for the choices. Clearly there aren't many ethnic minority refs in England so their hands are tied there. As there's so many available in NZ it would seem sensible to look at the processes in place there which encourage, or at least don't hinder, non white people.

I don't accept that just because the 4 man panel are all white they are all choosing the elite refs in a racist way as you seem to be implying and I don't think they would be helping anyone by picking someone who isn't white who they feel isn't good enough just so they can proudly point out they have chosen them.

Hey, I didnt say racist. You're putting words into my mouth there. 

I've come to believe diversity is a Good Thing. 

When I don't see it, I question why and what the consequences and causes might be.

It's interesting that you feel this is on merit and that there aren't any non white referees who are good enough.

Instead of skirting around what you think just spell it out then. You think that it's a white mens stitch up? What do you mean other than they are being racist? If you don't think this do you have an idea of why there aren't any non white elite refs for test matches?

I think it's an interesting phenomenon, was genuinely interested in my co-poster's opinions. I have no agenda. It just seemed odd to me suddenly.

So you like to talk about IWMRB and white mens stitch up to stir trouble? Realistically you could have talked about why there are no Samoan or Scottish people on the elite refs to officiate tests but choose to go down this road. It comes across that you do have an agenda tbh.

Part of the problem is that there are relatively few elite referees, compared to the number of elite players. Therefore, one would expect that, statistically-speaking, according to the demographics of top-flight rugby nations, a randomly selected referee from England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, France, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina would be white. The only Rugby nations that statistically should be expected to produce a 'non-white' referee are the Island nations and South Africa. The former do not have a large-enough / wealthy enough domestic league to be able to produce enough referees with top-level experience. That leaves SA: In SA, rugby is still a primarily white sport (so even though the nation is 80% black, this is not represented in rugby). Even so, there are several black and coloured refs at Vodacom and Currie cup level and many more at club and school level. So it is only a matter of time. Bare in mind that it takes a long time to come through the system (certainly in SA). Craig Joubert is SA's youngest ref I imagine, and he started reffing at club and school level in the mid '90s (I should know: he was also my u15 coach!). So, give it time GE...

GloriousEmpire wrote:You are missing the point here

I don't think I was. You were suggesting that the IRB has failed to appoint non-white referees to the elite panel. At the same time, you said that the NZRU has done all that you would want to ensure the number of Maori and Islander elite referees matched the ratios we see in player numbers in New Zealand.

That suggests to me that the IRB has ignored the numerous Maori and Islander candidates put forward by the NZRU. That sounds like a terrible oversight, so perhaps you can start off by naming them for us, so we can consider why the IRB might have disregarded the efforts of the NZRU.

Not sure what your issue is with NZ, or why you think NZ should lead the world to salvation on this issue. Pretty bizarre response by trying to blame NZ for an IRB failing.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you like to talk about IWMRB and white mens stitch up to stir trouble? Realistically you could have talked about why there are no Samoan or Scottish people on the elite refs to officiate tests but choose to go down this road. It comes across that you do have an agenda tbh.

Wow. When I see such defensive posts in realise other people are very self conscious about this state of affairs too. I think the first step is to be able to acknowledge it - it will let the guilt out.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Pretty bizarre response by trying to blame NZ for an IRB failing.

The IRB would be clearly failing if it had ignored all the good efforts you say the NZRU has made to develop elite, non-white referees. We would all be able to see this failure more clearly if you could just see your way to telling us who these candidates are.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you like to talk about IWMRB and white mens stitch up to stir trouble? Realistically you could have talked about why there are no Samoan or Scottish people on the elite refs to officiate tests but choose to go down this road. It comes across that you do have an agenda tbh.

Wow. When I see such defensive posts in realise other people are very self conscious about this state of affairs too. I think the first step is to be able to acknowledge it - it will let the guilt out.

Occasionally I think you aren't a complete WUM then you have threads like this which are debateable yet all you're doing is making snide comments and refusing to fully say what you mean.

I mean what I say. That's all. I'm not sparking some witch hunt of IRB management. 

Just saying its a bit of an odd coincidence and the referee panel looks a bit homogenous. My feeling is the IRB might want to find a way to mix it up a bit. Usually diversity brings rewards and I think it would be interesting to see a more diverse set of international refs. 

I also wonder why we have no women refs, I can't see why that wouldn't work.

if they are good enough then I doubt anyone will be prevented from being a ref.

Why aren't their any woman refs... how many woman are refereeing in the modern game compared to men? Lets say its 100 to 1.. well then by that for every 100 test quality referees we would have 1 woman no? and thats without stripping away any other issues.

No given their are only 20 odd test referees (probably less) for tier 1 rugby then I think its a long time before we had a woman who was skilled enough.

Then their is fitness, can a woman referee keep up as much as the male's. Even if she's in the top 10% of woman for fitness lets say... that wouldn't be the same for a man etc. Can a woman referee spend as much time as an ave. male referee, can she travel as much etc, does she have the means?

In the end its all to do with how many non white males enter into refereeing the sport... not only that, if at grassroots it requires a lot of self-funding and time then those who are more wealthy etc can give up their saturdays to not work etc... others may not be able to commit to such a luxury. In all rugby regions, whites are amongst the more wealthy groups so it would suggest they can undertake these positions... even if they wanted to.

Personally I think its a non issue... I wouldn't care if every ref was white as long as they were the best available.... it would be simply awful if we had a situation where we had to have a racial and gender bias where better referees were left on the sidelines.... we already have enough problems with the current batch, what the game does not need are people outside of their depth.

It could work quite well in theory if a woman controlled the game... put a lot of those who try and take the ref for a ride in their place. We always fight/talk back/question more with our fathers than our mothers afterall!

GloriousEmpire wrote:I mean what I say. That's all. I'm not sparking some witch hunt of IRB management. 

Just saying its a bit of an odd coincidence and the referee panel looks a bit homogenous. My feeling is the IRB might want to find a way to mix it up a bit. Usually diversity brings rewards and I think it would be interesting to see a more diverse set of international refs. 

I also wonder why we have no women refs, I can't see why that wouldn't work.

Which is more balanced than calling the IRB the IWMRB. When you think about it it's not really an odd coincidence on the Elite refs panels behalf as they have to judge refs who are already at a certain level. If a Samoan ref is reffing at a lower level they are not going to get the same consideration as a Samoan ref in the RABO as they aren't demonstrating they can ref at that level let alone the step up to tests. We obviously can't just select refs regardless of their competency as that would be illegal. You should be focusing on more refs getting trained and getting the opportunity in lower level leagues and on to the top leagues in England etc. In this respect you can see why I'm intertested in knowing what NZ have done to help this in their league.

I'm still fascinated that you seem to believe NZ should be solving this problem.

I didnt call the IRB the IWMRB im just saying that's what some people are calling it. 

I'm not sure Samoan rugby is of a lower quality than English rugby to be honest. I'm sure referees out there are just as competent.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm still fascinated that you seem to believe NZ should be solving this problem.

I think we are fascinated that by your claim that the NZRU is satisfactorily addressing the problem you have raised. No-one has made any similar claim about any other union. We'd like to know more about how you believe they have done this, and which non-white New Zealand referees have made it to the top, only to be ignored by the IRB.

I'm not sure why you want to turn a debate about a serious issue at the IRB into a chance to have a pop at NZ. 

I know you guys look to NZ to lead the world on the field - but seriously the administration has always been run out of the UK and Ireland. This is a problem that HQ must address.

Diversity for its own sake is up there alongside racism for me. Fundamentally it does not solve the issue. As long as the colour of your skin or your ethnic background has any, and I mean any, effect on who gets employed (be it as an "elite referee" or any other particular profession) the problem has not been solved. Frankly I don't give a toss what colour the current panel is as long as they're the best at what they do.

Exactly knowisit. It shouldn't have any bearing. So why does it?

The 1st and only time I've seeb the IRB referred to as the IWMRB is by you GE. Do you have any links of them referred to as this?

Again I'm not saying NZ should solve a problem but saying that as there isn't a problem there what have they done to ensure this as there's little point in reinventing the wheel if we don't have to.

Again you comment that the fact the panel is white it is having a bearing on them picking white men. So you're saying that they are basing this choice on sex and race terms ie they're being sexist and racist. Do you really believe that?

I'm saying the elite referee panel is all white makes, I have no idea who selects them.

You would expect any sample drawn from a population to be representative, that it isn't suggests one or more of a set of problems. I'm not sure how you can suggest there isn't an issue of some kind.

Whether NZ is overflowing with ethnically diverse referees really has no bearing on the issue at the IRB. It's an irrelevance entirely. 

Rather than try to scapegoat others or divert, why not address the issue at hand?

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm saying the elite referee panel is all white makes, I have no idea who selects them.

You would expect any sample drawn from a population to be representative, that it isn't suggests one or more of a set of problems. I'm not sure how you can suggest there isn't an issue of some kind.

Whether NZ is overflowing with ethnically diverse referees really has no bearing on the issue at the IRB. It's an irrelevance entirely. 

Rather than try to scapegoat others or divert, why not address the issue at hand?

The issue if there is one is below the IRB and their choices as there isn't the representation in the top leagues around the world therefore the fact that NZ is doing so well should highlight that they are doing something right where others are not. Thats not scapegoating thats saying well done and is there anything anyone can copy. By all means keep dodging questions though.

To ask you again, do you really believe the IRB panel who are choosing elite refs are being sexist and/or racist?

Why not woman refs? Just why not?

Do you really believe the IRB panel who are choosing elite refs are being sexist and/or racist GE?

7.5 when did I ever say that? Why don't you engage in the spirit of the thread instead of casting yourself as a sort of cyber extra for the Spanish Inquisition?

Your quote 'It shouldn't have any bearing. So why does it?' regarding the ethnic background of the IRB panel.

Do you believe it GE? A simple yes or no would do although you may want to add some explanation.

Obviously the IRB panel of international referees is not representative of the underlying population.

Now from a gender perspective, the reason for the bias is evident. However the ethnicity skew is harder to place. Either it is because all referees deserving of elevation happen to fall into a fairly narrow demographic, in which case I'm interested to know why this is, or it is because there is a preference to select referees for elevation from within that narrow demographic. In which case I'd also be interested to know why this is.

I'm not sure I can be any clearer than that.

On the gender skew, personally I don't see why this should exist. It may be we are missing out on some truely great referees just because they are women. I think the IRB should look at that.

The ethnicity issue, also.

Much clearer. I was obviously confused when you said that you feel that the ethnicity does have a bearing on who they are selecting but you're now saying that you don't know the reason so fair enough.

GE - the problem (if there is one) starts at the grassroots level - there is a large ethnically diverse player base in England and an increasingly large female one as well. However by definition a "player base" is exactly that people who want to play the game not referee or coach it.
At club level people tend to drift into the refereeing/coaching side of the game either because they cannot play anymore or when they come back the sport as parents (in my case both), very few people in my experience enter rugby to officiate it from a young age - trust me the various referees associations would welcome them with open arms if they did - but get into that aspect of the game too late to develop into top class refs.
It may be that more efforts need to be expended into getting people into refereeing - it might be a good idea to copy the FA in England who are trying to recruit the next generation of soccer referees from the people who don't quite make the grade as professional footballers but obviously have some knowledge and understanding of the game.
Given the comparative sizes of the rugby world and the football world it's not at all surprising that the top refs (of any national origin) are white men - all the top level games are played in "ethnically white" countries (SA excepted although other posters have pointed out it's still got high proportion of white players) - as they are fortunate to referee where the game is played to it's highest standard and therefore they are best developed.
In the same way as there are black and Asian umpires in cricket due to the game being played at a high level in Asia and the Caribbean - would you like to see a NZ game umpired by someone whose experience was limited to Dutch cricket?
Certainly here in the UK the various unions would collectively wet themselves if they could produce a BME or female match offiicial at the highest level.

Irish Londoner wrote:GE - the problem (if there is one) starts at the grassroots level - there is a large ethnically diverse player base in England and an increasingly large female one as well. However by definition a "player base" is exactly that people who want to play the game not referee or coach it.
At club level people tend to drift into the refereeing/coaching side of the game either because they cannot play anymore or when they come back the sport as parents (in my case both), very few people in my experience enter rugby to officiate it from a young age - trust me the various referees associations would welcome them with open arms if they did - but get into that aspect of the game too late to develop into top class refs.
It may be that more efforts need to be expended into getting people into refereeing - it might be a good idea to copy the FA in England who are trying to recruit the next generation of soccer referees from the people who don't quite make the grade as professional footballers but obviously have some knowledge and understanding of the game.
Given the comparative sizes of the rugby world and the football world it's not at all surprising that the top refs (of any national origin) are white men - all the top level games are played in "ethnically white" countries (SA excepted although other posters have pointed out it's still got high proportion of white players) - as they are fortunate to referee where the game is played to it's highest standard and therefore they are best developed.
In the same way as there are black and Asian umpires in cricket due to the game being played at a high level in Asia and the Caribbean - would you like to see a NZ game umpired by someone whose experience was limited to Dutch cricket?
Certainly here in the UK the various unions would collectively wet themselves if they could produce a BME or female match offiicial at the highest level.

I don't think I'd equate Samoan rugby with Dutch Cricket.

Just to pick up on another point you made, do you think there are dietary explanations for the increasing size of female players in England?  

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:GE - the problem (if there is one) starts at the grassroots level - there is a large ethnically diverse player base in England and an increasingly large female one as well. However by definition a "player base" is exactly that people who want to play the game not referee or coach it.
At club level people tend to drift into the refereeing/coaching side of the game either because they cannot play anymore or when they come back the sport as parents (in my case both), very few people in my experience enter rugby to officiate it from a young age - trust me the various referees associations would welcome them with open arms if they did - but get into that aspect of the game too late to develop into top class refs.
It may be that more efforts need to be expended into getting people into refereeing - it might be a good idea to copy the FA in England who are trying to recruit the next generation of soccer referees from the people who don't quite make the grade as professional footballers but obviously have some knowledge and understanding of the game.
Given the comparative sizes of the rugby world and the football world it's not at all surprising that the top refs (of any national origin) are white men - all the top level games are played in "ethnically white" countries (SA excepted although other posters have pointed out it's still got high proportion of white players) - as they are fortunate to referee where the game is played to it's highest standard and therefore they are best developed.
In the same way as there are black and Asian umpires in cricket due to the game being played at a high level in Asia and the Caribbean - would you like to see a NZ game umpired by someone whose experience was limited to Dutch cricket?
Certainly here in the UK the various unions would collectively wet themselves if they could produce a BME or female match offiicial at the highest level.

I don't think I'd equate Samoan rugby with Dutch Cricket.  

Just to pick up on another point you made, do you think there are dietary explanations for the increasing size of female players in England?  

Coming from an idiot from the 2nd fattest nation in the world:picard: 

GloriousEmpire wrote:Exactly knowisit. It shouldn't have any bearing. So why does it?

It doesn't.

 

rainbow-warrior wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:GE - the problem (if there is one) starts at the grassroots level - there is a large ethnically diverse player base in England and an increasingly large female one as well. However by definition a "player base" is exactly that people who want to play the game not referee or coach it.
At club level people tend to drift into the refereeing/coaching side of the game either because they cannot play anymore or when they come back the sport as parents (in my case both), very few people in my experience enter rugby to officiate it from a young age - trust me the various referees associations would welcome them with open arms if they did - but get into that aspect of the game too late to develop into top class refs.
It may be that more efforts need to be expended into getting people into refereeing - it might be a good idea to copy the FA in England who are trying to recruit the next generation of soccer referees from the people who don't quite make the grade as professional footballers but obviously have some knowledge and understanding of the game.
Given the comparative sizes of the rugby world and the football world it's not at all surprising that the top refs (of any national origin) are white men - all the top level games are played in "ethnically white" countries (SA excepted although other posters have pointed out it's still got high proportion of white players) - as they are fortunate to referee where the game is played to it's highest standard and therefore they are best developed.
In the same way as there are black and Asian umpires in cricket due to the game being played at a high level in Asia and the Caribbean - would you like to see a NZ game umpired by someone whose experience was limited to Dutch cricket?
Certainly here in the UK the various unions would collectively wet themselves if they could produce a BME or female match offiicial at the highest level.

I don't think I'd equate Samoan rugby with Dutch Cricket.  

Just to pick up on another point you made, do you think there are dietary explanations for the increasing size of female players in England?  

Coming from an idiot from the 2nd fattest nation in the world:picard: 

Believe you missed the misrelated principal in the original post.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Obviously the IRB panel of international referees is not representative of the underlying population.

Now from a gender perspective, the reason for the bias is evident.  However the ethnicity skew is harder to place. Either it is because all referees deserving of elevation happen to fall into a fairly narrow demographic, in which case I'm interested to know why this is, or it is because there is a preference to select referees for elevation from within that narrow demographic. In which case I'd also be interested to know why this is.

I'm not sure I can be any clearer than that.

On the gender skew, personally I don't see why this should exist. It may be we are missing out on some truely great referees just because they are women. I think the IRB should look at that.

The ethnicity issue, also.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

GloriousEmpire wrote:[
I don't think I'd equate Samoan rugby with Dutch Cricket.  

Just to pick up on another point you made, do you think there are dietary explanations for the increasing size of female players in England?  

I wasn't equating the quality levels, more a comparator insofar as a referee who solely had experince in Samoan domestic rugby would probably struggle to referee a top level match in the larger rugby countries in the same way an umpire used to standing at national level in Holland would have umpiring a test match. Not to say either could not or should not do it more about the development they would need to reach that level.

Maybe as others have posted there should be some form of sponsor/mentoring programme to get potential top level referees some experience with the larger countries to further their development and indeed a programme the other way to get the top referees involved in places where development potential has been identifed. Long term this may actually help to eradicate the NH/SH interpretation issues that arise from time to time and an increase in top level referees from any gender or ethnicity would be I'm sure welcomed.

I think the biggest problem a top level referee from a female and/or BME background would face would not be from the IRB but would be the media and possibly the fans - a black referee gives a dodgy game changer in SA or a woman does the same in Australia - be interesting to see the messagebaords a day later and indeed the "harmless banter" that a female or BME offical might get from the sidelines in the NH.

As everyone knows all English women are delicate roses and if you ever make it over to London I'd be delighted to introduce you to the fine ladies of the Saracens and England womens rugby teams who train just up the road from me.   

BTW Aplogies to all I just didn't want to write "player base" in the same sentence three times!
Blydi spelling and grammar plolice - it's getting like The Guardian in here!

I wasn't equating the quality levels, more a comparator insofar as a referee who solely had experince in Samoan domestic rugby would probably struggle to referee a top level match in the larger rugby countries in the same way an umpire used to standing at national level in Holland would have umpiring a test match. Not to say either could not or should not do it more about the development they would need to reach that level.

Maybe as others have posted there should be some form of sponsor/mentoring programme to get potential top level referees some experience with the larger countries to further their development and indeed a programme the other way to get the top referees involved in places where development potential has been identifed. Long term this may actually help to eradicate the NH/SH interpretation issues that arise from time to time and an increase in top level referees from any gender or ethnicity would be I'm sure welcomed.

I think it's a bit insulting to suggest that Samoan referees (for example) would struggle on "a bigger stage". The players seem to manage the step up for non problems, so I don't see why there would be a different expectation of a referee. The rugby is of the same quality, and they apply the same set of laws. Although I suspect this perception is at the heart of the issue. There are also referees of various Pacific Island origins around refereeing in NZ where the domestic rugby is of arguably higher quality; they do a good job and I don't think there is any need for a condescending mentoring programme, just personally.

On your other point about:

I think the biggest problem a top level referee from a female and/or BME background would face would not be from the IRB but would be the media and possibly the fans - a black referee gives a dodgy game changer in SA or a woman does the same in Australia - be interesting to see the messagebaords a day later and indeed the "harmless banter" that a female or BME offical might get from the sidelines in the NH.

That's just out and out discrimination, isn't it? I would be apalled if the IRB didn't name non-white referees just in case there was a racist response from some fans after a match. Interesting that fans have tolerated an openly gay referee without being homophobic, so perhaps fans aren't being given enough credit there?

But I value your honest input into the thread, rather than some of the silly carry on we've had so far.

I don't know the answer to the original question, but given some of the utter nonsense refereeing we've seen over the years, having a good look at the process for selecting referees and the "catchment pool" (for want of a better phrase) seems to me a very sensible thing to do.

GE- I wasn't suggesting that the IRB would not pick referees - what I was trying to to say was that IMHO the IRB are not actually discriminating, and that at some point in the future there will undoubtedly be a BME or female officating at the top level, I was suggesting that any such official may possibly get a rougher ride for their bad decisions from the media and less enlightened fans based on their race/gender than a WMCM would.
Think of how just a simple posting on this forum regarding the refereeing of a Rugby World Cup final can turn into a war

GloriousEmpire wrote:That's just out and out discrimination, isn't it? I would be apalled if the IRB didn't name non-white referees just in case there was a racist response from some fans after a match.

Indeed, but we have no examples of the IRB ever ignoring non-white referees on that basis.

However, at the same time you brought up this issue, you were quite clear, in answer to a direct question, that the NZRU was doing as much as you would hope to ensure that the proportion of elite non-white referees in the New Zealand game was up to the same proportion as the non-white playing base.

If this is true, as you claim, then we don`t need any speculation. There are quite clearly a larger number of elite non-white New Zealand referees which the IRB is ignoring. Given how strongly you feel about this, it is surprising that you have avoided identifying these individuals so we can join you in condemning the IRB.

Your reluctance to do so is beginning to make me wonder whether the NZRU really has been quite as effective at addressing the problem you have identified.