The Shocking standard of the Pro14

First topic message reminder :

Having been watching it since it was the original Celtic league and looking at comments about it online in all those years it's fair to say it's the most controversial competition in world rugby. There are always problems popping up that it could do without. No exaggeration to say it has a way to go yet.


What I've noticed in the last few years is the standard of play. It has dramatically improved!!!


Starting off with Glasgow's rise to win the competition. Then we had Connacht coming from nowhere to win it. Then the Scarlets won it in style. Those teams won by playing attractive running rugby.


Then last year Leinster won again after they've become one of the best non international teams in the world. Also last year we had Benetton and Zebre getting their act together and become hard teams to beat, especially Benetton. Edinburgh have become a tough team to beat too, much improved from previous years.


The South Africans are weak but they've added something exotic to the league. Cheetahs do look weaker than last season (too early to judge) but Kings look improved so far. After 2 poor seasons the buzz is back in Connacht and Cardiff are showing good signs.


So all in all the standard has improved greatly. That's putting the pressure on other traditionally strong sides like Munster, Ospreys and Ulster, which is no harm.


The league isn't without problems which are constantly highlighted so I though I'd take a look at the big picture for a change.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So you were expressing your dissatisfaction?

I was, as always, expressing my concerns and suggesting how they could be remedied.

Tell me how changing the name on the payslip remedies the situation?

Because, then, the boss of the ref, is not the same boss of the teams involved.

Except their boss is Greg Garner now and they'd still work for their unions outside of the league

I know.

So you want change to what we have?

NO. FFS.

I have already said, I want the refs to be under the employment of the Pro14, not the unions, because we have players, coaches and referees all under the same employer, and it just doesn't sit right with me.

Except the refs will still work for the unions in other competitions so you won't change anything

WORLD GOVERNANCE of Rugby too I suppose is the next cosy Open World plan. So maybe Lord's opinion might indeed be extended to competitions outside Pro14.
Why have Unions owning their refs or players or coaches at all? Why not just sign them over to the World Rugby Execs and have done with the whole concept of Union/National ownership rights. A pool of WR players given out to Nations on a long straw/short straw basis.

My one major criticism or caution about Pro14 is that it would try to grow out of the boots given to it and declare itself above the reach of its own 'bosses'. PRL toys with this concept already.

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:But you understand that nationality will be a big factor in complaints still?

Yes, but you will never get away from that .

 Something you rarely admit to until chased around a room and cornered, Lord.  The truth is National bias is the MAIN attack point - I repeat, the main attack point - of fans annoyed about ref decisions.  So, like has been said over and over on this topic, an Irish ref will remain an Irish ref, a Scottish ref will remain Scottish...unless he's Irish   Any implied/perceived  bias for an Irish side in decisions made will not automatically disappear simply because a League Company 'employs' the Irish ref.  Fans will still chant and boo the refs, based on where they come from.   So as a solution for trust issues, the single banner 'ownership' argument isn't a logical conclusion.

Yes it is, but the league, ultimately needs more refs. More refs from Wales, more refs from Ireland, more refs from Scotland, more refs from Italy and more refs from South Africa.

Some countries need to pull their weight more than others in this respect. But a team of refs, all working for the Pro14. Not the unions.

How many bloody refs you planning on? And how many weeks off do the paid-for excess refs get?

But the refs will still be employed by unions so you'll never get rid of that unless you ban refs officiating in the league from reffing at the elite level.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So you were expressing your dissatisfaction?

I was, as always, expressing my concerns and suggesting how they could be remedied.

Tell me how changing the name on the payslip remedies the situation?

Because, then, the boss of the ref, is not the same boss of the teams involved.

Except their boss is Greg Garner now and they'd still work for their unions outside of the league

I know.

So you want change to what we have?

NO. FFS.

I have already said, I want the refs to be under the employment of the Pro14, not the unions, because we have players, coaches and referees all under the same employer, and it just doesn't sit right with me.

Except the refs will still work for the unions in other competitions so you won't change anything

They can do what they like when they are doing "other" work. It's the Pro14 we are talking about here. If they want to sub contract to the unions for international matches, and they have the time, then good on them.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So you were expressing your dissatisfaction?

I was, as always, expressing my concerns and suggesting how they could be remedied.

Tell me how changing the name on the payslip remedies the situation?

Because, then, the boss of the ref, is not the same boss of the teams involved.

Except their boss is Greg Garner now and they'd still work for their unions outside of the league

I know.

So you want change to what we have?

NO. FFS.

I have already said, I want the refs to be under the employment of the Pro14, not the unions, because we have players, coaches and referees all under the same employer, and it just doesn't sit right with me.

Except the refs will still work for the unions in other competitions so you won't change anything

They can do what they like when they are doing "other" work. It's the Pro14 we are talking about here. If they want to sub contract to the unions for international matches, and they have the time, then good on them.

So getting paid by the unions isn't really a problem after all then?

No 7&1/2 wrote:But the refs will still be employed by unions so you'll never get rid of that unless you ban refs officiating in the league from reffing at the elite level.

What is this supposed to mean ? Why would you need to ban refs from anything ? I'm sorry bet yet again you have left me at a bemusement. Just because the refs would be employed by the Pro14, doesn't mean they cannot ref anywhere else.

You are allowed to have more than one job.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So you were expressing your dissatisfaction?

I was, as always, expressing my concerns and suggesting how they could be remedied.

Tell me how changing the name on the payslip remedies the situation?

Because, then, the boss of the ref, is not the same boss of the teams involved.

Except their boss is Greg Garner now and they'd still work for their unions outside of the league

I know.

So you want change to what we have?

NO. FFS.

I have already said, I want the refs to be under the employment of the Pro14, not the unions, because we have players, coaches and referees all under the same employer, and it just doesn't sit right with me.

Except the refs will still work for the unions in other competitions so you won't change anything

They can do what they like when they are doing "other" work. It's the Pro14 we are talking about here. If they want to sub contract to the unions for international matches, and they have the time, then good on them.

So getting paid by the unions isn't really a problem after all then?

It is when the ref and the players and the coaches are all paid by the SAME union. why are you taking me around the mulberry bush on this ?

So a Welsh ref plays things Pro14ish when reffing a Pro14 game (whatever Pro14 style reffing is, btw - we'd all have to come to a consensus on that for a start),
but he plays it Pro14 sytle because they pay his wages....and then he goes back to Union ownership for Internationals and he plays the breakdown in a completely different 'Welsh' way?

Those refs will be confused by the diversity of wage sources influencing their reffing style.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So you were expressing your dissatisfaction?

I was, as always, expressing my concerns and suggesting how they could be remedied.

Tell me how changing the name on the payslip remedies the situation?

Because, then, the boss of the ref, is not the same boss of the teams involved.

Except their boss is Greg Garner now and they'd still work for their unions outside of the league

I know.

So you want change to what we have?

NO. FFS.

I have already said, I want the refs to be under the employment of the Pro14, not the unions, because we have players, coaches and referees all under the same employer, and it just doesn't sit right with me.

Except the refs will still work for the unions in other competitions so you won't change anything

They can do what they like when they are doing "other" work. It's the Pro14 we are talking about here. If they want to sub contract to the unions for international matches, and they have the time, then good on them.

So getting paid by the unions isn't really a problem after all then?

It is when the ref and the players and the coaches are all paid by the SAME union. why are you taking me around the mulberry bush on this ?

I'm trying to grasp your logic, you've complained about the refs being paid by the unions now you've no problem with the refs still being paid for reffing other games so how exactly is the perception of bias or conflict removed?

SecretFly wrote:So a Welsh ref plays things Pro14ish when reffing a Pro14 game (whatever Pro14 style reffing is, btw - we'd all have to come to a consensus on that for a start),
but he plays it Pro14 sytle because they pay his wages....and then he goes back to Union ownership for Internationals and he plays the breakdown in a completely different 'Welsh' way?

Those refs will be confused by the diversity of wage sources influencing their reffing style.

Not to mention the mysterious appearance of extra pay in his pay packet (or in a small brown envelope) from the WRU as a sweentener to get him to ref in a certain way in the forthcoming Pro14 clash.  The clash where a win for the Welsh side against Leinster would guarantee them Champions Cup rugby and a better level of competition for the players at the club who also feature for Team Wales  

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:So a Welsh ref plays things Pro14ish when reffing a Pro14 game (whatever Pro14 style reffing is, btw - we'd all have to come to a consensus on that for a start),
but he plays it Pro14 sytle because they pay his wages....and then he goes back to Union ownership for Internationals and he plays the breakdown in a completely different 'Welsh' way?

Those refs will be confused by the diversity of wage sources influencing their reffing style.

Not to mention the mysterious appearance of extra pay in his pay packet (or in a small brown envelope) from the WRU as a sweentener to get him to ref in a certain way in the forthcoming Pro14 clash.  The clash where a win for the Welsh side against Leinster would guarantee them Champions Cup rugby and a better level of competition for the players at the club who also feature for Team Wales  

Reprehensible stuff there, Oracle! Might even be 'disgusting' if I get my little Pro14 book of inner meanings out to check.

I can just see the comments coming: “That sh*t bag ref! We would have won but he only went and reffed the breakdown like he does at international level! He was meant to do it Pro14 stylee. The swine! Its disgusting!”

Yep don't you just love it when members cannot debate and just come on here and take the p!ss instead ?

You know you can make a point when people can only resort to sarcasm. but thats V2 I guess.

marty2086 wrote:I'm trying to grasp your logic, you've complained about the refs being paid by the unions now you've no problem with the refs still being paid for reffing other games so how exactly is the perception of bias or conflict removed?

marty, I give up. FFS. You are really annoying, even for you.

You know exactly what I am getting at. Now give over.

LordDowlais wrote:Yep don't you just love it when members cannot debate and just come on here and take the p!ss instead ?

You know you can make a point when people can only resort to sarcasm. but thats V2 I guess.

It would help if you made serious points yourself! Complaining that refs have union ‘pay masters’ but then not minding if they have two pay masters, one of whom is still the union (and therefore a conflict of interest) is, frankly, ridiculous. So ridiculous that I’m convinced yours is a parody account. And therefore if you insist on taking the p!ss then I will too!

LordDowlais wrote:Yep don't you just love it when members cannot debate and just come on here and take the p!ss instead ?

You know you can make a point when people can only resort to sarcasm. but thats V2 I guess.

Will you ever stop being so resolutely po-faced, Lord. I find it 'disgusting' at this stage.

Smile a little. People can still have a valid opinion and have a laugh about it. Not every topic needs a dentist chair to resolve the tension.

So to get back to the po-faced biz then. Answer the question: Just how many refs are needed to service the Pro14 and who pays for them when they are retained by the Pro14 'ownership' model but not used on many weekends?

Lord did you even read the article. Pro14 pays the unions to rent the refs so the league "owns" them for the league. The.league pays them fees for matches now so you would assume there is a contract that the ref agrees with for fees for the league.

Lord is there anything in the article that you think is a positive move that will bring improvements.

I think the Pro 14 ref trainers working with union trainers is a good move to improve Quaility and Quanity

Double post

What they are doing in Italy


“We’ve gone into Italy to approach the players and said, ‘If any of you have got an interest in becoming a referee, we’ll fund that now.’ It’s not them deciding when they’ve finished playing that they’ll give refereeing a go.

“If they start now, with three or four years left in their playing career, we can work with them, get them games, build experience, so they can finish playing on the 31st of May and on the 1st of June they can become a full-time professional referee.”

TMOs in understand their logic as you need them to be part of the team and just get off work and Skype in 15mins before it starts

It just goes to show though, doesn't it.

In my opinion, Nigel Owens IS a world class ref.  But that opinion isn't universally held.  Lots of fans have little or no time for him - I even think quite a few Welsh fans have much to complain about him.

So.....................  this perfection level that seems to be the 'requirement'?  How do you achieve it in real practical terms when even the top ref mentioned as an example of a Pro14 'Test-Level' ref, is not universally regarded as one.

Answer is - you don't.

I'm starting to worry for ld s mental health.

SecretFly wrote:It just goes to show though, doesn't it.

In my opinion, Nigel Owens IS a world class ref.  But that opinion isn't universally held.  Lots of fans have little or no time for him - I even think quite a few Welsh fans have much to complain about him.

So.....................  this perfection level that seems to be the 'requirement'?  How do you achieve it in real practical terms when even the top ref mentioned as an example of a Pro14 'Test-Level' ref, is not universally regarded as one.

Answer is - you don't.

We could play with no ref and have VAR panel who watch all different angles and fan forums and put the decision up on the board and they work out the score at the end by who dominates each 10 minute play.

Refs are refs is my take on it. I believe Refs (in all their peculiar incarnations over the last 20 years or so) have added so much richness to rugby union. I've disagreed with many decisions, I've enjoyed some classic 606 ref chat battles but the ref mike and the vibrancy of their role...it has added so much 'entertainment value' to the game as it has grown through professionalism.

Perfection will never be achieved. Fans will always complain. It's part of the fun. Fans enjoy having guys to boo at (however much they protest the opposite) Sometimes it has been way overboard but it all balances out.

So I like the human frailty element. Here's to shoddy Pro14 refs

Agree SF.

What so many of the ref bashers don't seem to appreciate is that the Referee is there to adjudicate. He (she) is there to make a judgement as many Laws do not have a black and white outcome but are open to interpretation. The best a Ref can do is to be consistent in that interpretation for both sides. He may not be consistent from game to game and certainly not consistent with other referees trying to follow some universal diktat issued by his employers or World Rugby.

If one team has a dominant scrum, should the referee penalise the weaker side out of the game and show a series of yellow/red cards ending in uncontested scrums? The game would not be served well for teams or spectators. Weather conditions and pitch surface are also factors that would change how the same referee would run the game, therefore if the same referee must approach games dependent on circumstances, how can any League expect 'consistency' from its officials.

Consistency won't come from referee junkets in foreign hotels, because interpretation is both individual and subjective. If those who love bashing the officials really want consistency they should be calling for objective technology to make the ref's life easier. For example if the ball is tracked by GPS and every player also has a tracker, decisions such as being ahead of the kicker and forward passes can be electronically flagged immediately. Reducing the number of decisions a referee is responsible for, should allow him to be more focused on ruling the decisions he still has to make.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I'm trying to grasp your logic, you've complained about the refs being paid by the unions now you've no problem with the refs still being paid for reffing other games so how exactly is the perception of bias or conflict removed?

marty, I give up. FFS. You are really annoying, even for you.

You know exactly what I am getting at. Now give over.

I have no idea what you are talking about because you constantly contradict yourself, stop having a go at me

You have complained about refs being paid by the unions yet are ok about them still getting paid by the unions, how can that be?

A lot of good points there aukster. I'll also throw in expectation of individual supporters. You mention a game being ruined if a ref penalised a team off the park at the scrum as your example of where a match can be ruined. From my point of view it's the opposite! A side shouldn't be penalised for being better; if they are destroying a scrum they should ge the reward of penalties and yellows and possibly reds. Yes you may get uncontested scrums but if it happened to a team.enough they'd pick proper props etc.

No 7&1/2 wrote:A lot of good points there aukster. I'll also throw in expectation of individual supporters. You mention a game being ruined if a ref penalised a team off the park at the scrum as your example of where a match can be ruined. From my point of view it's the opposite! A side shouldn't be penalised for being better; if they are destroying a scrum they should ge the reward of penalties and yellows and possibly reds. Yes you may get uncontested scrums but if it happened to a team.enough they'd pick proper props etc.

I am happy for front rowers to get YC but getting a RC because the other front row is better seems unfair. And can't really swap players because the guy on the bench is probably worse.

I.can see the point but if a team is picking front row players not up to the task of scrummaging;tough.

You've also got to consider is its getting to the point of repatedly scrums the defending team and weaker prop is likely.on their 5 metre line and then.you're more likely to see pen tries rather than red cards.

No 7&1/2 wrote:A lot of good points there aukster. I'll also throw in expectation of individual supporters. You mention a game being ruined if a ref penalised a team off the park at the scrum as your example of where a match can be ruined. From my point of view it's the opposite! A side shouldn't be penalised for being better; if they are destroying a scrum they should ge the reward of penalties and yellows and possibly reds. Yes you may get uncontested scrums but if it happened to a team.enough they'd pick proper props etc.

The example is not meant to be anti-scrum, but rather to highlight that the referee is in control of the spectacle. He can insist the Scrum Half 'use it' before the dominant team get a second shove on, or conversely allow more time if the scrum is stable albeit retreating. In one circumstance the Referee may judge it safe and fair enough to let the scrum play out to a penalty conclusion, but in another instance may consider it better to minimise the risk and insist the ball be played. He can also control 'advantage' to some extent thus potentially increasing or decreasing the number of scrums in the game.

Your point about the expectation of individual supporters is on the money - one man's meat is another man's poison. One fan's game may be ruined by the referee lessening his side's scrum dominance just as much as another's may be ruined by the ref not lessening it enough. Either way the referee will be the target of one disgruntled fan and possibly both.

I think we're pretty much in full agreement.

Brendan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:A lot of good points there aukster. I'll also throw in expectation of individual supporters. You mention a game being ruined if a ref penalised a team off the park at the scrum as your example of where a match can be ruined. From my point of view it's the opposite! A side shouldn't be penalised for being better; if they are destroying a scrum they should ge the reward of penalties and yellows and possibly reds. Yes you may get uncontested scrums but if it happened to a team.enough they'd pick proper props etc.

I am happy for front rowers to get YC but getting a RC because the other front row is better seems unfair.  And can't really swap players because the guy on the bench is probably worse.

I too am not comfortable with the thought of players getting a red card simply because their technique is not good enough. If a scrum is moving forward close to the line (same applies to a maul) and it is then collapsed by the defending team a Penalty Try should be the first sanction imo. Too many times refs wait for multiple infringements before using this sanction. Second time would be PT and YC, while RC should only come out if someone is being actively dangerous.

Problem with moving to an uncontested scrum is that then you have immediately removed a weapon from the non-offending side.

Referees have to be employed by the league. They can't be refereeing their colleagues.

PhilBB wrote:Referees have to be employed by the league. They can't be refereeing their colleagues.

Try telling marty and No 7&1/2 that.

LordDowlais wrote:

PhilBB wrote:Referees have to be employed by the league. They can't be refereeing their colleagues.

Try telling marty and No 7&1/2 that.

Except you've advocated for them to still be paid by the unions

And they can quite easily be paid by the Unions. As explained in various companies their are jobs to hold other people in their companies and indeed partner organisations to account. Works fine as it does in this league.

No 7&1/2 wrote:And they can quite easily be paid by the Unions. As explained in various companies their are jobs to hold other people in their companies and indeed partner organisations to account. Works fine as it does in this league.

Which companies? Which jobs?

Shed loads in the nhs where various organisations work together to provide a patient pathway. You're paid to do a specific job not think hang on this guy or girl is paid by the same organisation as me.
Point lord doesn't want to address though is unions will still pay refs who are internationals. Would you want a ban on league refs reffing European and internationals?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Shed loads in the nhs where various organisations work together to provide a patient pathway. You're paid to do a specific job not think hang on this guy or girl is paid by the same organisation as me.
Point lord doesn't want to address though is unions will still pay refs who are internationals. Would you want a ban on league refs reffing European and internationals?

You didn't answer the question.

I know why you didn't answer the question because your analogy is false. And we know why it's false because the "shed loads in the NHS" etc. are working to a set and strict criteria that has to be followed. There is no "materiality" as there is for rugby referees who make their decisions solely based on their opinion and interpretation.

And it's not beyond the wit of man for a referee to be employed by a competition and then seconded to a different competition. Now THAT is exactly the kind of thing that happens in businesses everywhere, unlike your nonsense claim about referees.

You don't know much about the nhs then fair enough. So what you and lord are effectively saying is that it's deliberate to favour teams or players by the refs and not unconcious due to be being paid by the same organisation. If it was unconcious the fact they are being paid by the same people would still have an effect. So they mist be thinking I'm getting a different pot this week thus...

Ever had an internal audit where ever you work?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ever had an internal audit where ever you work?

Not one that is based on materiality, no. Not one that is based solely on opinion, no.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You don't know much about the nhs then fair enough. So what you and lord are effectively saying is that it's deliberate to favour teams or players by the refs and not unconcious due to be being paid by the same organisation. If it was unconcious the fact they are being paid by the same people would still have an effect.  So they mist be thinking I'm getting a different pot this week thus...

Your powers of perception are as bad as your comprehension of audits.

A referee's unconscious bias will increase when refereeing teams he is familiar with. This is just human nature. Those they work with more often will be more favourable, will affect their decision on materiality etc.

It happens loads. So you believe the refs show deliberate bias then now?

No 7&1/2 wrote:It happens loads. So you believe the refs show deliberate bias then now?

Look, as much as I do not like to stick up for him, not once has he even alluded to that.

He's implying it lord by saying having the same pay slip on a different day of he month mean s it's a secondment so they will no longer see players as colleagues. He knows that wouldn't make a difference hence I'd like him to come out and admit he thinks there's deliberate bias.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It happens loads. So you believe the refs show deliberate bias then now?

You now seem unable to differentiate between deliberate and unconscious

Jesus wept, that's abysmal from you.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's implying it lord by saying having the same pay slip on a different day of he month mean s it's a secondment so they will no longer see players as colleagues. He knows that wouldn't make a difference hence I'd like him to come out and admit he thinks there's deliberate bias.

What a dreadful post.

An Irish ref can't referee the Irish national team, so the secondment point is utterly irrelevant.

This is some woefully dumb posting from you.

Ah so an irish team can't play a non irish player got you. When is this ban brought in?good to know also hat you can't get this unconcious bias as the refs brains are it'd to know that's only their colleague for 4 weeks in November. Dear me Phil.