Steve Walsh - was he pushed ?

Being bored with the usual 6n post mortems hashing over same ground, so I'm starting a slightly different one.
First though: congrats to Wales England Ireland on such a tightly fought competition overall, for an exceptionally entertaining Super Saturday and finally to Ireland for a well won title.

Now, I for one think Steve Walsh and or the AFU contributed by pulling said Mr Walsh at the last moment before Super Saturday.
Guys at the pub thought he was reffing the match until I mentioned he was not; and I'm glad we had Nigel Owens.

But what was that last minute retirement timing all about ?

It wasn't last minute for the England game, but before the Ireland Wales game. Business commitments was stated and I for one hope it's that as I've heard rumours to the contrary.

'Business commitments' does sound like a good excuse

No 7&1/2 wrote:It wasn't last minute for the England game, but before the Ireland Wales game. Business commitments was stated and I for one hope it's that as I've heard rumours to the contrary.

Ok that was the 'reason' given.. but the sudden timing ?

The sudden timing before the Ireland game is where the rumours have sprung from.

Isn't there some story about the last game he did ref?

'Business commitments' is a reasonable reason to retire but the timing is definitely odd. Pulling out with such short notice? Why not announce the intention to retire after the 6N's. I've not heard any of the rumours mentioned above - I just think the timing was strange.

What I don't get is, he has had in his planning for sometime that he would be in charge (and assistant) in the 6N so could easily have arranged his 'Business commitments' to not co-inside with his refereeing.

If it is due to Business commitments then he has done the correct thing in retiring from refereeing. Its a shame because I actually liked him as a ref.

Steve Walsh is a preening primadona. Leaving in the manner he did - just before the Ireland-Wales game is exactly his style.

LondonTiger wrote:Steve Walsh is a preening primadona. Leaving in the manner he did - just before the Ireland-Wales game is exactly his style.

I would have had him announcing it at half time for maximum impact - could have spent the 2nd half strutting like a peacock!

Actually perhaps he should have done a "George Crawford"

No 7&1/2 wrote:The sudden timing before the Ireland game is where the rumours have sprung from.

You've been sitting on rumours you've heard and you haven't shared them with your pals on 606????

That is totally negligent, 7&1/2! Out with it this instant! Especially considering all the lovely wumtastic stuff we've been indulging in since that Ireland v Wales game, I think everyone needs to hear the true Rumour!!

SecretFly wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The sudden timing before the Ireland game is where the rumours have sprung from.

You've been sitting on rumours you've heard and you haven't shared them with your pals on 606????

That is totally negligent, 7&1/2!  Out with it this instant!  Especially considering all the lovely wumtastic stuff we've been indulging in since that Ireland v Wales game, I think everyone needs to hear the true Rumour!!

So that the Welsh squad knew exactly where they stood before the start: Absolutely had to thrash Italy by huge points as they could no longer depend upon Walsh blowing England off the park in the 'final'. Wales almost did it too, and Owens had the last word at Twickenham, or is that whistle ?

lostinwales wrote:Isn't there some story about the last game he did ref?

Not that Ive heard, What story?

No secrets now. Just cough up the 'stories'. You can keep it all legal by putting a few 'Allegedlys' in.

I'll start yis off:

"I'm not certain but.............. ...... allegedly he......................."

Now someone who has a story finish it.

Was at the hairdressers......

LondonTiger wrote:Steve Walsh is a preening primadona. Leaving in the manner he did - just before the Ireland-Wales game is exactly his style.

He is at that but I still feel he was one of the better referee's and a definite loss to the game.

I liked him. He was a pantomime cad, a mischievous git, a romantic lead, a barroom brawler... but he was overall a good guy with a knowing twinkle in his eye - as in knowing he was annoying fanbases all over the place.

Hair today - gone tomorrow.

offload wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Steve Walsh is a preening primadona. Leaving in the manner he did - just before the Ireland-Wales game is exactly his style.

I would have had him announcing it at half time for maximum impact - could have spent the 2nd half strutting like a peacock!

Agree. And he would have started his retirement speach by saying: "If you think this silly Six Nations Rugby tournament is important, I have real news.........."

lostinwales wrote:Isn't there some story about the last game he did ref?

Thisi what you mean:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/referees-as-accountable-as-players-for-super-rugby-excitement-says-wallaby-great-simon-poidevin-20150219-13jj9q.html

And as for performance. I think he could be a good ref. He could also be a very very bad one, but 'lets not go there'....

????? Let's not indeed!

LondonTiger wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Isn't there some story about the last game he did ref?

Thisi what you mean:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/referees-as-accountable-as-players-for-super-rugby-excitement-says-wallaby-great-simon-poidevin-20150219-13jj9q.html

So the Aussies are complaining about a Great game of NH attritional rugby? The fools - will they never have the skills to take us on at our game?

No 7&1/2 wrote:The sudden timing before the Ireland game is where the rumours have sprung from.

You dont think it is odd that he dropped out and Barnes stepped in just before Ireland played Wales for the grand slam in '09 too?

Ireland went through over 30 phases to get their winning drop goal. Barnes refusing to penalise Irelands opponents in that game too, quelle surprise. Yet Wales get the ball on the restart and Ireland are penalised on the first ruck. I cant stand Wayne Barnes. Useless, useless, useless referee.

I would not be surprised at all if there was a lot of English interest in Walshes "business interests" in the lead up to his retirement. What referee would retire a few months before the WC? Story smells very fishey.

All refs make mistakes. That said Barnes reffed you lot fine. Like I said I hope it's his business committments.

No 7&1/2 wrote:All refs make mistakes. That said Barnes reffed you lot fine. Like I said I hope it's his business committments.

No he didnt. Not by a long shot. He doesnt apply the same standards to our opponents. There are plenty of examples which you are well aware of. He is a dreadful referee.

Once again you completely side stepped my question.

GunsGerms wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The sudden timing before the Ireland game is where the rumours have sprung from.

You dont think it is odd that he dropped out and Barnes stepped in just before Ireland played Wales for the grand slam in '09 too?

Ireland went through over 30 phases to get their winning drop goal. Barnes refusing to penalise Irelands opponents in that game too, quelle surprise. Yet Wales get the ball on the restart and Ireland are penalised on the first ruck. I cant stand Wayne Barnes. Useless, useless, useless referee.

I would not be surprised at all if there was a lot of English interest in Walshes "business interests" in the lead up to his retirement. What referee would retire a few months before the WC? Story smells very fishey.

Twickenham HQ now has a conference centre, health club, hotel restaurant etc. With the RWC about to hit town there is a lucrative hair salon franchise coming up to serve the huge number of VIPs passing through who will pay good money for the Walsh look..That is the outside business opportunity, or so Ian Ritchie tells me.

GunsGerms wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:All refs make mistakes. That said Barnes reffed you lot fine. Like I said I hope it's his business committments.

No he didnt. Not by a long shot. He doesnt apply the same standards to our opponents. There are plenty of examples which you are well aware of. He is a dreadful referee.

Once again you completely side stepped my question.

It seemed odd yes that an international ref chose other business connections rather than reffing. That's where the rumours start. You can say Barnes is a dreadful ref but he reffed that game well. He treated both sides fairly. Anyone can sit and pick apart little bits and pieces and start crying, we just choose not to!

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:All refs make mistakes. That said Barnes reffed you lot fine. Like I said I hope it's his business committments.

No he didnt. Not by a long shot. He doesnt apply the same standards to our opponents. There are plenty of examples which you are well aware of. He is a dreadful referee.

Once again you completely side stepped my question.

It seemed odd yes that an international ref chose other business connections rather than reffing. That's where the rumours start. You can say Barnes is a dreadful ref but he reffed that game well. He treated both sides fairly. Anyone can sit and pick apart little bits and pieces and start crying, we just choose not to!

Similarly anyone can chose to bury their head in the sand and choose to believe the world is full of flowers and fairy dust and other really nice things. The fact is Barnes has a history of applying different standards to Ireland's opposition. The recent game v Wales was no different.

He was much stricter on the breakdown when Wales were in the ascendancy, gave them 4 penalties in 10 minutes. Whereas when Ireland were in the ascendancy he took a completely different view at the breakdown allowed Ireland go through 32 phases without applying the same standards as before and then gave Wales a soft penalty. They guy is a dire excuse for an official.

When Ireland were in the ascendancy he gave 3, a warning, a 4th and a yellow card. To be honest you seem to see what you want to see, Barnes didn't make you lose the game; Wales did. Try and accept and move on.

So am I reading these posts correctly. One poster is suggesting that Walsh was paid to retire, so Ireland would lose a game?

No 7&1/2 wrote:When Ireland were in the ascendancy he gave 3, a warning, a 4th and a yellow card. To be honest you seem to see what you want to see, Barnes didn't make you lose the game; Wales did. Try and accept and move on.

Wales are a very good side more than capable of beating Ireland without help from a ref. Sadly Barnes reffed the game and he is an absolute abomination. Why should anyone have to like dreadful one sided refereeing?

Ah come on now 7&1/2, as you say Barnes treated both sides fairly and for that matter he was damned harsh on Wales by issuing 2 yellow cards (the one 2 minutes from time hardly counts as it was 2 minutes from time). The problem I see with Barnes is that he's not only inconsistent but also never allows the players to dictate the pace of the match. He runs the show and is far too whistle-happy for officiating in what is the jewel in the NH crown. I would have preferred Walsh for all his faults over Barnes any day. Barnes is not now and never will be fit for purpose so lets hope he too finds 'business interests'.
Now Nigel Owens, can we not test human cloning on him, the man's head an shoulders above any other ref on the planet and the known universe.

LondonTiger wrote:So am I reading these posts correctly. One poster is suggesting that Walsh was paid to retire, so Ireland would lose a game?

No I pointed out a very suspicious symmetry to the '09 and '15 Ireland v Wales games.

I also pointed out how strange it is that a referee at the peak of his career would retire a few months before a world cup.

Pete330v2 wrote:Ah come on now 7&1/2, as you say Barnes treated both sides fairly and for that matter he was damned harsh on Wales by issuing 2 yellow cards (the one 2 minutes from time hardly counts as it was 2 minutes from time). The problem I see with Barnes is that he's not only inconsistent but also never allows the players to dictate the pace of the match. He runs the show and is far too whistle-happy for officiating in what is the jewel in the NH crown. I would have preferred Walsh for all his faults over Barnes any day. Barnes is not now and never will be fit for purpose so lets hope he too finds 'business interests'.
Now Nigel Owens, can we not test human cloning on him, the man's head an shoulders above any other ref on the planet and the known universe.

2nd half was good though? You think that may have been something to do with the fact both coaches got hold of their players and said listen to what barnes is telling you? Not like they didn't know what he was penalising them for.

Barnes is an ok ref - who blows what he sees.
Owens is an ok ref - who allows players to cheat. Owen's main strength is the way he lectures the players. (when he can avoid getting all chummy that is).


Thing is I wish there were more refs like Clancy. People argue he is pedantic - but if all refs penalised players for cheating, the game would soon become much improved as they would stop doing it.


Instead we have an over-complicated law-book that the refs ignore. That is the way to anarchy.

Incidentally Pete I think Owens is a fantastic ref but he's made some blatent mistakes. Respect the refs and the hard jobs they do.

GunsGerms wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So am I reading these posts correctly. One poster is suggesting that Walsh was paid to retire, so Ireland would lose a game?

No I pointed out a very suspicious symmetry to the '09 and '15 Ireland v Wales games.

I also pointed out how strange it is that a referee at the peak of his career would retire a few months before a world cup.

And what conclusion are you too scared to mention about this "suspicious activity". Are you, as so often, just Poopie spreading?

One of the big problems for the modern game is that different refs look for different things, particularly at the breakdown and particularly if they do most of their refereeing in different leagues.

Did Ireland approach the breakdown differently between the game against England and the game against Wales? Not as far as I can see. But Joubert was happy with the way Ireland hit rucks, and Barnes wasn't. The flip side of the same coin is that Joubert didn't like how England hit rucks, but Barnes was happy with how Wales did it. Both referees were largely consistent about what they allowed and did not allow, but faced with contrasting styles at the breakdown the balance of penalties went one way.

It's not bias, and it's not incompetence. In refereeing a ruck you will be faced with infringements every time, and you have to decide what to blow for, what to warn for and what to let pass. Most refs - in an effort to be consistent - have a mental picture of what they want to see and blow up if it's breached. That's a problem if your team has been coached to do something that doesn't fit the picture - but it's not with the ref, it's with the coaches and the system.

England have struggled with Joubert's interpretation of the breakdown for several years. Ireland, by the sound of things, have struggled with Barnes's. But if a coach can't adapt a team to a ref who has consistently blown for the same things year after year, whose fault is that?

All the same, rugby will be better if it can get more consistency across different refs and tournaments. I'm not sure how you achieve it.

The big problem is that you have so many things to monitor, all at the same time. Personally (and I try to do this when reffing my son's tournaments), I think the best approach for a ref to use is one of sequence. You try to keep in your head the sequence of events required for a clean breakdown (or scrum, or whatever), and you worry about each of those events happening before moving on to the next: has the tackle gone to ground? was the ball carrier held? Has the tackler released and stopped interfering with the ball? Is there anyone legally contesting the ball? Has the ball carrier placed the ball? Are the participants entering the ruck legally?

Then, before you blow, you double check by working backwards from the offence to check it wasn't caused by an earlier one: why did that prop drop his bind? Was the opposing prop's bind and body angle legal?

The French refs tend to do this well; but having tried it myself it is very, very hard to learn and takes a lot of work.

Well written post P4.

Refereeing is far more difficult than playing. So many things going on, so many things that can be penalised but just one limited view and a split second to make up your mind.

The Artist formerly Known as IRB - review every international match and if they see a pattern of unfair decision making, they would act.

Is it possible that a Ref could go onto a pitch intending to treat the teams differently. With the shady world of sports betting and match fixing of course it is. To influence a game the ref is the best person to bribe.

Would a ref get away with unfairly reffing a single team over a number of years? No they would not.

All International refs are actually pretty damned good. A lot better than us keyboard refs. Do they make mistakes. Hell yes. Are there refs that some teams always struggle with again hell yes. Is this because of active bias? no. It is because so much of decision making is about interpretation.

LondonTiger wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:So am I reading these posts correctly. One poster is suggesting that Walsh was paid to retire, so Ireland would lose a game?

No I pointed out a very suspicious symmetry to the '09 and '15 Ireland v Wales games.

I also pointed out how strange it is that a referee at the peak of his career would retire a few months before a world cup.

And what conclusion are you too scared to mention about this "suspicious activity". Are you, as so often,  just Poopie spreading?

Draw your own conclusions if you want. Why do you you need me to do your thinking for you? I think you would be an ideal candidate for the army. Do you ever question anything?

Poorfour wrote:One of the big problems for the modern game is that different refs look for different things, particularly at the breakdown and particularly if they do most of their refereeing in different leagues.

Did Ireland approach the breakdown differently between the game against England and the game against Wales? Not as far as I can see. But Joubert was happy with the way Ireland hit rucks, and Barnes wasn't. The flip side of the same coin is that Joubert didn't like how England hit rucks, but Barnes was happy with how Wales did it. Both referees were largely consistent about what they allowed and did not allow, but faced with contrasting styles at the breakdown the balance of penalties went one way.

It's not bias, and it's not incompetence. In refereeing a ruck you will be faced with infringements every time, and you have to decide what to blow for, what to warn for and what to let pass. Most refs - in an effort to be consistent - have a mental picture of what they want to see and blow up if it's breached. That's a problem if your team has been coached to do something that doesn't fit the picture - but it's not with the ref, it's with the coaches and the system.

England have struggled with Joubert's interpretation of the breakdown for several years. Ireland, by the sound of things, have struggled with Barnes's. But if a coach can't adapt a team to a ref who has consistently blown for the same things year after year, whose fault is that?

All the same, rugby will be better if it can get more consistency across different refs and tournaments. I'm not sure how you achieve it.

The big problem is that you have so many things to monitor, all at the same time. Personally (and I try to do this when reffing my son's tournaments), I think the best approach for a ref to use is one of sequence. You try to keep in your head the sequence of events required for a clean breakdown (or scrum, or whatever), and you worry about each of those events happening before moving on to the next: has the tackle gone to ground? was the ball carrier held? Has the tackler released and stopped interfering with the ball? Is there anyone legally contesting the ball? Has the ball carrier placed the ball? Are the participants entering the ruck legally?

Then, before you blow, you double check by working backwards from the offence to check it wasn't caused by an earlier one: why did that prop drop his bind? Was the opposing prop's bind and body angle legal?

The French refs tend to do this well; but having tried it myself it is very, very hard to learn and takes a lot of work.

The problem with Barnes once again is that he treats some teams differently and his decisions are not consistent so therefore not predictable. Ireland were penalised 10 times and Wales 11 times. This is despite Ireland having vastly more posession and terrotity and Wales defending way more rucks and defending way more in general. Im sorry but his refereeing does not add up to anything remotely consistent or fair whatsoever at all.

He was consistent. wales play better than ireland shocker. Read all about it.

GunsGerms wrote: I think you would be an ideal candidate for the army. Do you ever question anything?

From the guy with his head in the sand about drug use in rugby, despite the growing number of failed tests - including in Ireland - that is rather amusing.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:Ah come on now 7&1/2, as you say Barnes treated both sides fairly and for that matter he was damned harsh on Wales by issuing 2 yellow cards (the one 2 minutes from time hardly counts as it was 2 minutes from time). The problem I see with Barnes is that he's not only inconsistent but also never allows the players to dictate the pace of the match. He runs the show and is far too whistle-happy for officiating in what is the jewel in the NH crown. I would have preferred Walsh for all his faults over Barnes any day. Barnes is not now and never will be fit for purpose so lets hope he too finds 'business interests'.
Now Nigel Owens, can we not test human cloning on him, the man's head an shoulders above any other ref on the planet and the known universe.

2nd half was good though? You think that may have been something to do with the fact both coaches got hold of their players and said listen to what barnes is telling you? Not like they didn't know what he was penalising them for.

Oh god yeah, it's up to any team to evolve according to the conditions set by any ref. With Barnes you never know the conditions from one minute to the next. I still think with any ref Wales were going to be the better team and for that matter coulda, woulda and probably shoulda taken the grand slam this year.

LondonTiger wrote:

GunsGerms wrote: I think you would be an ideal candidate for the army. Do you ever question anything?

From the guy with his head in the sand about drug use in rugby, despite the growing number of failed tests - including in Ireland - that is rather amusing.

What failed tests in Ireland?

Frankie Sheehan over ten years ago failed a test because of a drug that was traced back to his inhailer. This was proven so he wasnt banned.

Heaslip failed one test also about ten years ago due to high testosterone levels but it was proven that he consistently has naturally high testosterone levels.

What other failed drugs tests have their been? Has anyone ever been banned?

There are two failed tests in Ireland in the history of rugby and yet you want me to believe that there are systemic issues? You are an absolute quack. You are convinced that there is corruption re drug taking but cant accept that Irelands win loss ratio when Barnes refs is a little dodgy to say the least.

With Barnes by contrast my obeservations are things that have actually happened not fantasy or make believe that you want to believe.

GunsGerms wrote:The problem with Barnes once again is that he treats some teams differently and his decisions are not consistent so therefore not predictable. Ireland were penalised 10 times and Wales 11 times. This is despite Ireland having vastly more posession and terrotity and Wales defending way more rucks and defending way more in general. Im sorry but his refereeing does not add up to anything remotely consistent or fair whatsoever at all.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but World Rugby doesn't agree, does it? And it didn't agree with me about Walsh.

But having trained as a ref, I now watch their decision-making very closely. Every ref has occasional howlers but it is very rare to see a ref consistently making decisions for which there is no sound technical justification. (The only example I can think of is Steve Walsh's repeated failure to spot - or even look for - Adam Jones's illegal bind in the 2012 Wales-England match)

For several years, Barnes refereed pretty much every game between Quins and Tigers, and Quins always seemed to get the worst of it. There were some bad mistakes (carding Will Skinner for picking up a ball that had popped out of a scrum - one he admitted at a talk on refereeing I attended), but far more cases where he had spotted something that was not immediately obvious to the crowd but was technically entirely justifiable. I may not have liked the decisions, and I'm fully aware that another ref might have interpreted the same event differently. But his decisions were not wrong.

The only thing a ref can do is set out his stall for how he wants to ref the game, be consistent in his decisions and clear in his explanations, and give the captains a fair hearing if they want clarification or to bring something to his attention. Barnes wasn't being inconsistent, he was being consistent with his own standards - the fact that it's happened twice should tell you that. The problem is that Ireland were consistently playing in a way that led to infringements.

Teams play the game in different ways. That means that sometimes that will suit what the ref is looking for and sometimes it won't. Tough. What he can't do is try to referee to the style of both teams, because that would mean applying different standards and it would be almost impossible to avoid bias.

The only practical option for a ref when confronted by two different styles is to adjust his view of what is material. Owens and the French refs do this well: they will tolerate a certain amount of mess, and a certain level of infringement in the game as long as it is not interfering with the flow of the game and giving the less-infringing side a consistent disadvantage.

Barnes (and Clancy) are much more in the mould of blowing up for whatever they see. I know whose style I prefer - and it's telling that of 10 refs on the international panel, 4 are French and one is Owens.

I stupidly thought there was a whole other (very long) thread focused just on Barnes. I believe this one was about Walsh