Wayne Barnes Slammed over Video Nasty

The influential and respected retired South african referee Jonathan Kaplan, considered by many as the best referee ever to preside over the game of rugby has slammed Wayne Barnes for contemplating the home producer's video offering that led to the south African victory last weekend. In his "rate the ref" website.

the keenly observant Kaplan points out that a biased home TV producer should not be allowed to determine the outcome of a major test match by playing a clip "over and over" to incite the crowd to bring it to the attention of the match officials.

He also complains that Barnes is lazy "walks a lot" and is too lippy "talks a lot".

Nice to see a South African admitting the mistake finally, especially one as respected and influential as Kaplan.

He also mentions that South African fans shouldn't write this incident off by playing it off against perceived historical injustices.

Link Dick?

Can't post links but here's the quotes:

"
If you are a Bok supporter, you will be saying we deserved it, and how many times it happened against us. The protocol and process will mean nothing. But there is an important point to make here. I doubt (very much) whether that clip would have been brought up on the screen by producers in Aus or NZ and replayed over and over. Is it right that someone outside of the domain of the match officials can affect the outcome of a major test match"

"He walks a lot. He talks a lot. And I wasn’t that impressed when he penalized Serfontein for not rolling away when he could not (unplayable was the right call) or Jannie Du Plessis for side entry on the All Black line when his action had no influence on the play at all (he attempted a clean and missed his target) or the resets of scrum when Franks feet are so far back on the touch, that he is almost certainly hanging over the cliff (not supporting his own body weight) and the last penalty… "

I thought Kaplan said Barnes was a good ref?

Maybe I read it wrong.

Lance has it right. Kaplan has been moaning about this. Or maybe he moaned once, and different papers covered every day.

Kaplan talks a lot though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Link Dick?

Also I don't really like Dick, but as I've said as you clearly do, Each man to his own.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11339878

Richard wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Link Dick?

Also I don't really like Dick, but as I've said as you clearly do, Each man to his own.

Cheers Dick.

Maybe we should just get the result reversed, how about that.

At least Richard will be satisfied then.

No, don't be silly biltong

Why not?

It could set a precedent for all future F...ups.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Richard wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Link Dick?

Also I don't really like Dick, but as I've said as you clearly do, Each man to his own.

Cheers Dick.

I've rarely encountered a man with such fondness for Dick.

But that's an aside.

Interestingly Kaplan also slates Nigel Owens in his next article. Whilst making a comment about northern hemisphere referees involved in both final weekend RC matches! I'm stunned to see this hemispherean rift seems in the consciousness of the highest ranking officials - I assumed it was a preoccupation of fans alone.

Whatever happened to AWOP? He was good for a laugh. Someone said he was Japanese. I was very surprised.

Biltong wrote:Why not?

It could set a precedent for all future F...ups.

I'm not questioning the result Biltong. South Africa deserved the win in my mind as much as anyone who wins a close one - let's not forget the kick was simply astonishing.

What I have issue with is Barnes going all ex-protocol and making the laws up as he went along. A common theme for him.

ebop wrote:Whatever happened to AWOP? He was good for a laugh. Someone said he was Japanese. I was very surprised.

I think he has come down with a curious case of identity confusion.

I think he doesn't know who he is anymore, it must be hard to flop around like that all the time

Richard wrote:

Biltong wrote:Why not?

It could set a precedent for all future F...ups.

I'm not questioning the result Biltong. South Africa deserved the win in my mind as much as anyone who wins a close one - let's not forget the kick was simply astonishing.

What I have issue with is Barnes going all ex-protocol and making the laws up as he went along. A common theme for him.

Then you should have an issue with many matches where the bigscreen has effected referees to react to crowd boo's

Richard wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Richard wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Link Dick?

Also I don't really like Dick, but as I've said as you clearly do, Each man to his own.

Cheers Dick.

I've rarely encountered a man with such fondness for Dick.

But that's an aside.

Interestingly Kaplan also slates Nigel Owens in his next article. Whilst making a comment about northern hemisphere referees involved in both final weekend RC matches! I'm stunned to see this hemispherean rift seems in the consciousness of the highest ranking officials - I assumed it was a preoccupation of fans alone.

You live a sheltered life Dick.

Biltong wrote:

Richard wrote:

Biltong wrote:Why not?

It could set a precedent for all future F...ups.

I'm not questioning the result Biltong. South Africa deserved the win in my mind as much as anyone who wins a close one - let's not forget the kick was simply astonishing.

What I have issue with is Barnes going all ex-protocol and making the laws up as he went along. A common theme for him.

Then you should have an issue with many matches where the bigscreen has effected referees to react to crowd boo's

You can't justify wrongness by pointing out their is a lot of it.

It's wrong. Every time.

Richard wrote:

Biltong wrote:

Richard wrote:

Biltong wrote:Why not?

It could set a precedent for all future F...ups.

I'm not questioning the result Biltong. South Africa deserved the win in my mind as much as anyone who wins a close one - let's not forget the kick was simply astonishing.

What I have issue with is Barnes going all ex-protocol and making the laws up as he went along. A common theme for him.

Then you should have an issue with many matches where the bigscreen has effected referees to react to crowd boo's

You can't justify wrongness by pointing out their is a lot of it.

It's wrong. Every time.

Whether it is wrong or right every time, and the fact that there is a lot of it suggests the IRB should make a ruling on it.

We all do it but taking a step back its pretty stupid complaining only about one incident out of many in 80 minutes, usually just because its the last significant one.

Richard wrote:The influential and respected retired South african referee Jonathan Kaplan, considered by many as the best referee ever to preside over the game of rugby

Sorry, think they spelled Nigel Owens wrong here.

If refs see it, they have to rule on it. Can't blame Barnes. Or any other ref. IRB regs most of all demand common sense from refs and fair play from players.

If u want to stop this, you need to prevent anything being shown in the big screen that is not requested by the technical team. Super sport in this instance.

I gather some sports don't show replays on the big screen at games to avoid the exact same thing that happened in the weekend. This would be a good move for rugby also in future.

Richard wrote:Can't post links but here's the quotes:

"
If you are a Bok supporter, you will be saying we deserved it, and how many times it happened against us. The protocol and process will mean nothing. But there is an important point to make here. I doubt (very much) whether that clip would have been brought up on the screen by producers in Aus or NZ and replayed over and over. Is it right that someone outside of the domain of the match officials can affect the outcome of a major test match"

"He walks a lot. He talks a lot. And I wasn’t that impressed when he penalized Serfontein for not rolling away when he could not (unplayable was the right call) or Jannie Du Plessis for side entry on the All Black line when his action had no influence on the play at all (he attempted a clean and missed his target) or the resets of scrum when Franks feet are so far back on the touch, that he is almost certainly hanging over the cliff (not supporting his own body weight) and the last penalty… "

Hahaha Ghost.  Great to see you are still trying your best. Nice cut and paste there. "He walks a lot. He talks a lot".

This is the actual quote from Kaplan

"I thought Wayne Barnes had a decent match. He walks a lot. He talks a lot," Kaplan said, adding that the last-gasp penalty was "a brave call".

"But he let the game flow with the right amount of empathy and game management. He was even-handed in his approach. He is a superior communicator. And he is smart!

"He showed his experience in this toughest of environments when the reffing in this tournament has been quite ordinary, and deserves credit for that."

ebop wrote:I gather some sports don't show replays on the big screen at games to avoid the exact same thing that happened in the weekend. This would be a good move for rugby also in future.

an interesting point (far more interesting than the selective quoting of the OP - ). I remember going to Chelsea-Newcastle a few years back when Chelsea won with a last minute winner from Kalou, who was about three of four yards off-side (not exaggerating) at the time. The Newcastle players all rushed to the linesman of course, so you knew something was up, and no replay of the goal was shown, which only confirmed this (they showed replays of the other two goals, and indeed of various incidents throughout).

Similar thing happened for the infamous Henry "hand of god" moment vs Ireland. Again, no replay was shown. Interesting that in both cases it was a decision/mistake benefitting the home team, wonder if they would have shown it had it been the other way around (probably)...

Actually I realise this doesn't address the point ebop made at all

I think when you pay to go and see an event live in the stadium you deserve to be able to see replays really (if a try happened down the other end of the pitch you might not have had a great view, etc.), so don't think banning replays altogether is really a viable option. So what to do? I don't know...

Wasn't Zidane sent off in the world cup final due to a video reply on the big screen?

That is some quite serious misquoting that was done above.

That kind of deliberate foul play is an automatic yellow for me

The refs have been allowed to use the bih screen a while now. It change last year to expand from just foul play

http://www.sanzarrugby.com/therugbychampionship/news/referees-may-now-use-big-screen-to-rule-after-irb-protocol-amendment/

Come on Dick, you need to keep up to date with this if you're going to ghost Barnes.

The difference in rugby is that we already use video replays. So the horse is already out of the gate compared to football.

But I definitely think broadcasters should not be able to pick and choose what shows on the big screen. There is enough of a home team advantage already

True Hammer, but the point is that there won't be any indiscretions by the host nation shown on the big screen for the ref to look up and see over and over. Do we need neutral broadcasters shipped in to produce the show? Of course not.

It is a simple ruling, either show it or don't show it.

Ut just for those who didn't watch the match, the sequence of play in that passage was shown ONCE after the scrum has been called.

It wasn't selective, it wasn't repeated, it has been standard procedure in SUper RUgby and RC rugby that when play stops for a line out, scrum or penalty, replays of the sequence of action prior to the set phase is shown.

Super sport did the same thing that the Australian and New Zealand broadcasters have been doing for yonks.

Just to add, the repeated viewing was the TMO.

Mad, that's quite interesting to hear those football examples. I heard that the Premier League doesn't show replays on the screen anymore. That's just anecdotal but you guys may know. Guess the thing with football is that referees would seldom change their mind after seeing replays whereas rugby referees are more inclined to. Maybe in football, they don't show replays to avoid crowd trouble. Dunno, football crowds in the UK are better behaved these days so maybe not.

ps. Biltong, this is no criticism of SA (I've moderated my views since the weekend) as you're right. It probably is common across all countries. It's just that it does provide an unfair advantage to the home team that shouldn't exist. Had Schalk head highed Messam at the same moment instead I doubt it would have received the same treatment from the broadcasters and referee.

I agree ebop, the home team does get the advantage over the away team from the broadcaster.

However what struck me about this instance is that it is the first time someone has ever complained about it.

Prior to this it has never been an issue.

ebop wrote:Mad, that's quite interesting to hear those football examples. I heard that the Premier League doesn't show replays on the screen anymore. That's just anecdotal but you guys may know. Guess the thing with football is that referees would seldom change their mind after seeing replays whereas rugby referees are more inclined to. Maybe in football, they don't show replays to avoid crowd trouble. Dunno, football crowds in the UK are better behaved these days so maybe not.

ps. Biltong, this is no criticism of SA (I've moderated my views since the weekend) as you're right. It probably is common across all countries. It's just that it does provide an unfair advantage to the home team that shouldn't exist. Had Schalk head highed Messam at the same moment instead I doubt it would have received the same treatment from the broadcasters and referee.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_rM0W-GSBo

This was Schalk Burger gouging Luke Fitzgerald during the Lions 2nd test. It says Sky on the top but it was Supersport who were the camera team and in control of the shots. That was a video reply. I wasn't at the game so I can't tell if it went on the big screen but they didn't shy away from the incident.

I honestly don't know if they show replays at PL matches nowadays. I haven't been to a live game for about four years (I don't live in England, and it's increasingly difficult and expensive to get tickets to games in any case from the accounts of those who do go). Hammer might know though?

Certainly yesterday at Wembley (England vs San Marino) they showed a replay of a wrongly disallowed England goal which was (predictably and understandably) booed by the crowd.

Football refs don't really change their mind, but you have to remember in Football there's no (official) video replay rights for the refs (there probably should be, but that's another point altogether). Wheread in rugby the ref is entitled to.

It's certainly an advantage to the home team. I'm not entirely sure it's more of an unfair advantage than crowds influencing the ref, or making a racket to stop the line-out calls of the opposition being heard, etc. Home advantage is real, and unless you either

a) ban replays altogether, which I'm not a fan of, or
b) somehow force neutral broadcasters for all matches

there's not really much you can do about this one...

Exactly biltong. Because it was at a key moment and a light bulb has gone off. We've moved beyond the 'we was robbed', which was post game hysteria, into a more reflective look at it. What happened is common in every game and I've been in games watching such instances and have got my boo on. But now, I'm thinking, mmmm. This kind of thing is more of a clever tool than I've ever given it credit for. Maybe it is just part of home advantage in the modern game and it is ok. Maybe it could be a good thing and will make players play with even more care to avoid doing stupid things which would be a good thing.

Richard wrote:The influential and respected retired South african referee Jonathan Kaplan, considered by many as the best referee ever to preside over the game of rugby

After such a hilarious start I was expecting comedy gold.

Was disappointed to find yet another fishing expedition with mouldy bait.


C-

In the end you can't take away all aspects of home advantage.

Trying to get in neutral broadcasters is ridiculous. So Fox Sport in AUS is going to win the rights to play SA vs. NZ? What happens if AUS has a chance of victory if one of them slips up... so you need Sky Europe then right. Won't happen.

Refs can be swayed as much by the crowd booing a collision or cheering a try. Are we going to allow only neutral fans into stadiums only too? Or perhaps insist that for every 1 SA fan we need 1 NZ fan???

Broadcasters are not affiliated with the unions, they don't take orders at least in SA. Supersport is a private company. They are answerable to their subscribers and given they are also providing global viewership I assume they will have it contractually agreed that broadcasting has to take a neutral stance.

You can't take out all off-field advantages away from the game. Its impossible. I remember people saying its unfair because the British travel so well in terms of following their sports teams. We're happy to take your money when you visit our nation but you can't get tickets to watch games!!! Come on lets get some common sense here.

LondonTiger wrote:

Richard wrote:The influential and respected retired South african referee Jonathan Kaplan, considered by many as the best referee ever to preside over the game of rugby

After such a hilarious start I was expecting comedy gold.

Was disappointed to find yet another fishing expedition with mouldy bait.


C-

Who said Barnes had a decent game.

ebop wrote:Exactly biltong. Because it was at a key moment and a light bulb has gone off. We've moved beyond the 'we was robbed', which was post game hysteria, into a more reflective look at it. What happened is common in every game and I've been in games watching such instances and have got my boo on. But now, I'm thinking, mmmm. This kind of thing is more of a clever tool than I've ever given it credit for. Maybe it is just part of home advantage in the modern game and it is ok. Maybe it could be a good thing and will make players play with even more care to avoid doing stupid things which would be a good thing.

Good post ebop, and I agree with you, the light bulb went off in this oe because it was a key moment at the end of a match.

The issue is tough, in the middle of the match it is also a key moment as a player can be sent to the bin for such foul play.

SO what makes one moment more important than another?

Perhaps it is best then to only allow live footage on the big screen, I am just not sure how it is going to happen, as most big screens these days receive the exact same footage as we at home, it isn't a separate feed.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I honestly don't know if they show replays at PL matches nowadays. I haven't been to a live game for about four years (I don't live in England, and it's increasingly difficult and expensive to get tickets to games in any case from the accounts of those who do go). Hammer might know though?

Certainly yesterday at Wembley (England vs San Marino) they showed a replay of a wrongly disallowed England goal which was (predictably and understandably) booed by the crowd.

Football refs don't really change their mind, but you have to remember in Football there's no (official) video replay rights for the refs (there probably should be, but that's another point altogether). Wheread in rugby the ref is entitled to.

It's certainly an advantage to the home team. I'm not entirely sure it's more of an unfair advantage than crowds influencing the ref, or making a racket to stop the line-out calls of the opposition being heard, etc. Home advantage is real, and unless you either

a) ban replays altogether, which I'm not a fan of, or
b) somehow force neutral broadcasters for all matches

there's not really much you can do about this one...

The issue is the feed to the big screen is the same one we get at home, there is no separate feed to the bigscreen where you can pick and choose what you see.

As for neutral broadcasters, that will never happen, Super sport pays millions to broadcast home matches. so does every other broadcaster.

Why do we assume broadcasters are automatically biased? They have a job to do.

Do you think the controller sits behind a desk saying... "uh, Jaco... you can't show that upper cut from Bakkies, he might get cited bru".

They people don't work for SARU, they work for a private company. I've seen many video replys on boks doing nasty work just as I've seen Fox sport show clips of Quade being a pest and Hartley dropping elbows on Sky.

Referees now make use of videos replays to confirm or change their original decision, and in a way use the TMO more for guidance and a second option rather than accepting the TMO's decision as final. This seems a change from previous seasons.

I also thought they had a remit to check for foul play via using video replays.   So it would have been very difficult for Barnes (who I thought had a good game, and the game itself was very good indeed) to ignore a potential act of foul play.

Obviously he is not in full control of what he sees, but it certainly looked a penalty and possibly a yellow card though it would have made no difference at that stage.  Very good kick by Lambie though.

CB

Completely agree CB, the kick was immense, imagine you have to come on, misses your first kick which was 20 meters closer, you have to convert a 55 meter kick which you aren't really known for, the pressure, expectation of the crowd and you nail it.

Not enough credit given to Lambie for making it.

First saw Kaplans comments on Planet rugby as I read it Kaplan wasn't criticising at all
saying swinging arm etc.definietly .Penalty.Great kick by Lambie,Barnes like most Refs.

Has his own style,earlier in the RC Argentina had a try disallowed v NZ studio panel
said why not refer to the big screen?here they did.

Well the OP always seems to have an agenda leading to highly selective quoting and readings of the events but sometimes his threads do lead to interesting discussions

I stopped reading after it said Kaplan was considered by many as one of the best refs in the game. Clearly a WUM

This is worthy of discussion in my view. The question is to what extent should the home broadcaster be allowed to influence the game by showing replays of incidents live on the big screen in the ground? The question isn't should the result from the NZ v SA match be overturned? Or, was it poor refereeing by Barnes? Or,does the call make up for a some poor calls by referees in games involving the boks over the last few years? Or, is Kaplan a naughty naughty boy? Or is the OP a WUM?

We aren't talking about whether the boks deserved to win. The game was a great game. The boks played exceptionally well. The referee made 50-50 calls both ways and missed offences by both sides. There are no complaints about the result from the AB's, the majority of the press or their fans.  

We're not talking about whether Barnes is biased. Referee's make a significant number of calls during the game, they do it in real time often at a distance. Some they get right, some they get wrong, some they miss.

We aren't talking about whether the SA media is corrupt. As has pointed out replays have been shown on the big screen and referee's do use them. In that respect this was the same. It happens in all nations.

What I think we should be talking about is. Should there be limits on what can be shown on the big screen. I think the answer is yes there should.

There are a number of issues with refereeing in rugby. Essentially their is a tension between maintaining the character and speed of the games, vs making the right decisions and maintaining neutrality. TV replays allow the referee to review a situation, often with a good view and make a considered opinion, and hopefully a more accurate decision. The down side is it takes time. Endless replays of potential tries don't necessarily make for a better game. What we have been getting is referees sometimes viewing the last play on the big screen when it's broken down as they make a call. In general it probably works.

Where last weekend varies is that it goes back several phases of play and selectively focuses on a piece of play missed by the referee. This is the point I raised in earlier posts. It's a point that was picked up by a number of South African commentators (e..g. Keohane in his column) after the match and made by
Kaplan on his webpage in the following days.

In many respects it better to ignore the match as such and just discuss the ideal situation. For me that's a protocol with the broadcaster that ensures that some degree of neutrality in the replays. The reality is the issue would have arisen sooner later anyway. It could have been any team, playing away. For me it's an issue easily addressed by the IRB.

I agree it needs discussing too bc but any attempt to draw reasonable discussion draws a sour grapes response, even your post here requiring the obligatory no complaints, boks deserved it preclaimer. The nature of how this one came across with two minutes to go suggests someone was specifically looking for an occurrence to influence the result.

In time someones ego will get to them and we'll get the 'the day I beat the All Blacks' story because someone just can't keep quiet. At least that's how i prefer to remember this one, the chances of this happening again hopefully remote, though if I were the broadcaster I'd feel embarrassed if i had any notion of being a professional, judgement poorly displayed in this case.